Article: The Concept of Energy Exchanges in Model "A" and Construction of Two Main Vertical Subtypes by V.V. Meged, A.A. Ovcharov (Contact/Inert subtypes)

[mu4]

You can view the page at http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...ical-sub-types

[EyeSeeCold]

The article is missing.

[mu4]

I removed it for now pending further translation. It's in a very untranslated state.

[EyeSeeCold]

Oh yea, well thanks to whoever translates it.


I'm pretty sure now that Inert/Contact is the more appropriate subtype system than Accepting/Producing. The article in English would be great for checking that out.

[tcaudilllg]

Disagree. Accepting/producing reveals that people can use the functions counter-clockwise as well as clockwise. That tells us a very great deal.

In other news, they've still got a ways to catch up. Sometimes it's best not to overthink a concept.

[silke]

I actually like this subtyping scheme better than Accepting/Producing one or DCNH - it explains a few observations that I'm made before of social interactions.

The Accepting/Producting subtype model never made much sense, since it implies that a given subtype will simultaneously emphasize two functions that are opposites i.e. Accepting/Ni-ILI would have both Ni and Se strengthened at the same time, while Producing/Te-ILI has both Te and Fi simultaneously strengthened - which contradicts both Jung's and socionics premise that intuitive and sensing functions, as well as thinking and feeling functions, are opposites of each other (thus you can't emphasize both N and S at the same time or T and F). This contradiction is avoided in the Contact/Inert system.

Meged&Ovcharvo's Inert/Contact system also coincides with my rl observations better: that leading function subtype leads to focus on HA/activating function, and being creative-sub leads to a greater emphasis on suggestive/dual-seeking function.

This could also explain something I've observed - that people of dominant function subtypes are more tolerant of their PoLR and ignoring functions when those are being expressed. People of creative function subtype are more prone to actively attacking this kind of information. On the other hand, people of creative function subtype are more tolerant of their demonstrative and role functions, while people of leading function subtype will take more aggressive stance towards expressions of these. ... Explains why conflictors can actually get along alright if they are of same subtype (both inert or both contact), because then they are both expressing functions that the other person is more tolerant of, which minimizes instances of open antagonism between them.

[mu4]

I think Inert/Contact is similar to 1st/2nd function subtypes, we can take the same approach with accentuated functions and apply it to Accepting/Producing functional dichotomy.

1467 vs 2358
1357 vs 2468

I think there is possibility of Bold/Cautious(A Extratim subtype vs Introtim Subtype) subtypes as well as other subtypes based on differences in the the accepting/producting function, such as Evaluatory/Sitational.

It's also possible for subtypes of any of the different functional dichotomies.

Also this sort of subtyping thought experiment it's possible to have different representation of the subtype.

Say a Contact ILE would have 2-3 functions accentuationed, which is Ti-Se. Taking myself as a example, I've typed myself ILE-LSI subtype(based on thinking that my 2nd and 3rd functions are more developed), and I think I can act like my supervisee sometimes. But this can also be a product of being an Evaluatory/Situational function dichotomy accentuation as well. However, the other function don't match, I don't have accentuated 6th and 7th function. This doesn't mean that there can't be someone else can't be a situational subtype. Looking at the functional dichotomies as areas of accentuation can allow for more nuanced description of the differences in functional accentuation within identical sociotypes. I don't think necessarily one system based on a functional dichotomy is better then another, just sometimes we need to focus on non-ego functions as a area of analysis.

[EyeSeeCold]

I think Inert/Contact is similar to 1st/2nd function subtypes, we can take the same approach with accentuated functions and apply it to Accepting/Producing functional dichotomy.

1467 vs 2358
1357 vs 2468

I think there is possibility of Bold/Cautious(A Extratim subtype vs Introtim Subtype) subtypes as well as other subtypes based on differences in the the accepting/producting function, such as Evaluatory/Sitational.

It's also possible for subtypes of any of the different functional dichotomies.

Also this sort of subtyping thought experiment it's possible to have different representation of the subtype.

But this can also be a product of being an Evaluatory/Situational function dichotomy accentuation as well. However, the other function don't match, I don't have accentuated 6th and 7th function. This doesn't mean that there can't be someone else can't be a situational subtype. Looking at the functional dichotomies as areas of accentuation can allow for more nuanced description of the differences in functional accentuation within identical sociotypes. I don't think necessarily one system based on a functional dichotomy is better then another, just sometimes we need to focus on non-ego functions as a area of analysis.

That is a subtype mess lol. I think what you are talking about deals with perspectives, not actual static subtype. Either way, the lowest common denominator is Ego 2 subtype of Accepting-Inert-Evaluatory-Bold / Producing-Contact-Situational-Cautious.

Say a Contact ILE would have 2-3 functions accentuationed, which is Ti-Se. Taking myself as a example, I've typed myself ILE-LSI subtype(based on thinking that my 2nd and 3rd functions are more developed), and I think I can act like my supervisee sometimes.

I'd keep it at Beta ST because of ambiguity, though I think Irrationality/Rationality is a constant.

[Pookie]

I like how this is worded. It makes subtyping people that are different than my type much easier.

[glam]

bump

i have been reading through an article "Compatible subtypes" on the compatibility of Vertical (Inert/Contact) subtypes, by Meged & Ovcharov.

this article says that in Duality, the nature of Vertical subtype compatibility differs between duals of each combination of subtypes (Inert + Contact, Contact + Inert, Inert + Inert, and Contact + Contact), due to the differences in the enhanced functions for each respective type & their subtype.

for "intellectual" compatibility: work, occupation, communication, productive activity, etc. - Opposite subtypes are most compatible. (Inert + Contact, or Contact + Inert)

e.g. an Inert IEE (enhanced Ne/Ti/Te/Ni) and a Contact SLI (enhanced Te/Ni/Ne/Ti). they both have the same enhanced functions (Intuitive and Logical - NT functions) and therefore may be drawn to similar spheres of activity, as we see in the types of each Club (e.g. NTs = researchers, NFs = humanitarians, etc.)

The most consistent in the work . . . Intuitive subtype of the IEE [Inert] and the second, logical subtype of SLI [Contact]. . . For example, a subtype of the [Inert] IEE . . . [even though the main sociotype is a Humanitarian type], is also adjacent to the scientific and theoretical setup by a characteristic increase in the vertical block A model of intuition and logic (as in type ILE). Those elements are [also] strengthened in the [Contact] sub-type SLI. Such a pair can be readily and productively engaged in the humanities . . . An [ethical] subtype of the IEE [Contact] and [sensing] subtype SLI [Inert] are more likely to humanitarian and social direction of the activity. In both cases, an extrovert rather IEE may be moderated. But if the program specifies the SLI, then the dual pair of related scientific and theoretical setting will be engaged in industrial and scientific activities. This is the main tipnaya orientation and additional SLI - in both. A second dual pair is willing to engage in productive and social activities.

for emotional compatibility: relationships, romance, sex, etc. - Like subtypes are most compatible. (Inert + Inert, or Contact + Contact)

e.g. a Contact IEI (enhanced Fe/Si/Se/Fi) and a Contact SLE (enhanced Ti/Ne/Ni/Te). the Contact IEI has enhanced SF functions, and the Contact SLE has enhanced NT functions; SF + NT = differing but compatible strengths and weaknesses.

As for emotional compatibility, which is manifested on the ethical level of contacts, there are more compatible with the strengthening of subtypes opposite but complementary elements of information metabolism: sensory perceptions and intuitive features, the logic of relations and the ethics of emotion, volition and sensory intuition of time, the business logic and ethics of relations. . . . Such a pair of well-relax with each other and remove unnecessary stress, because their interests do not overlap, and there is mutual. In addition, they will have the same performance biorhythms. It is important for emotional and harmonious sexual relationship. In contrast, better communicate different subtypes. In this case, one will be effective at the beginning, and the second in its completion.

these quotes are from a machine translation, and i added words & notes in brackets, as well as rearranged some words to try and clarify what seemed to be the intended meaning; apologies for the awkwardness.

also, this post is only in regards to Duality; the article also goes on to address Inert/Contact subtype compatibility in regards to the other intertype relations.

Original link (not translated): http://socionic.ru/index.php/2010-10...11-09-23-59-27

CMS link here on 16t (translated): http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/243