Quote Originally Posted by EyeSeeCold View Post
Given the type ILE NeTi as an example, if it is split between Leading and Creating, NeNiFeFi (NF club, Internal ) is on one side and SeSiTeTi(ST club, External) is on the other.

Following Jung's fundamental principle of psychological function opposition, differentiation between Leading and Creating function subtypes effectively equates to Club subtypings, which is also poled on the Inert-Contact function dichotomy. Below is the full layout of Inert and Contact subtypes.

Inert Subtypes: Investing Contact Subtypes: Consuming
Alpha Quadra α
Ne-ENTp-NF (Internal)
Si-ISFp-ST (External)
Fe-ESFj-NF (Internal)
Ti-INTj-ST (External)
Alpha Quadra α
Ti-ENTp-ST (External)
Fe-ISFp-NF (Internal)
Si-ESFj-ST (External)
Ne-INTj-NF (Internal)
Beta Quadra β
Se-ESTp-SF (Involved)
Ni-INFp-NT (Abstract)
Fe-ENFj-SF (Involved)
Ti-ISTj-NT (Abstract)
Beta Quadra β
Ti-ESTp-NT (Abstract)
Fe-INFp-SF (Involved)
Ni-ENFj-NT (Abstract)
Se-ISTj-SF (Involved)
Gamma Quadra γ
Se-ESFp-ST (External)
Ni-INTp-NF (Internal)
Te-ENTj-ST (External)
Fi-ISFj-NF (Internal)
Gamma Quadra γ
Fi-ESFp-NF (Internal)
Te-INTp-ST (External)
Ni-ENTj-NF (Internal)
Se-ISFj-ST (External)
Delta Quadra δ
Ne-ENFp-NT (Abstract)
Si-ISTp-SF (Involved)
Te-ESTj-NT (Abstract)
Fi-INFj-SF (Involved)
Delta Quadra δ
Fi-ENFp-SF (Involved)
Te-ISTp-NT (Abstract)
Si-ESTj-SF (Involved)
Ne-INFj-NT (Abstract)

The functional divide found between Inert-Contact(1,4,6,7-2,3,5,8) equates to the dichotomous quaternions (small groups) of:
Irrational + Positivist + Asking = ENTp - INFp - ESFp - ISTp
Irrational + Negativist + Declaring = ISFp - ESTp - INTp - ENFp
Rational + Positivist + Declaring = ESFj - ISTj - ENTj - INFj
Rational + Negativist + Asking = INTj - ENFj - ISFj - ESTj

So if Inert/Contact is valid as a subtype system, type simulation is expressed through these groupings.


See Also:

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...Meged-Ovcharov
This article by Meged-Ovcharov lays out the groundwork for study into Vertical/Inert-Contact subtypes. Only ENFp is used as an example, but the article still provides some practical insight.

http://socionic.ru/index.php/2010-10...10-14-21-07-24
Meged and Ovcharov's Subtype descriptions are listed here.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tion)?p=811883
This article mentions type imitation within the Benefit rings which has some relevance to the overall concept of type similarity.

http://socionics.kiev.ua/articles/fe...-group/thes02/
Socionist Victor DarkAngelFireWolf69 explores the idea of type similarity through the "Instrumental" or Contact functions.

http://goul.socionics.kiev.ua/2010/1...li-nevyigodno/
DarkAngelFireWolf69 expands on the notion of type imitation and similarity, this time taking the dichotomous approach which deals with Asking/Declaring+Rational/Irrational+Positivist/Negativist, paralleling the functional approach.

http://www.socioniks.net/biblioteka/7/kolca_zakaza.html
This article takes a dichotomous approach to energy-information transference which gives rise to psychological and social type simulation.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...arrator-cycles
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...l=1#post705492
These posts by labcoat take a more analytic approach to the oscillatory bonds of type simulation, identifying a new set of embedded functions/elements.
ok, i vaguely get what you're saying.

this sounds like a rehash of the taciturn/narrator cycle theory claims. an expansion of the theory to include subtypes. i'm not a fan of subtypes but this is at least a small step removed from not being completely wrong.

the better approach to subtypes is to view them as temporary divergences of orientation. the type is static, the subtype is dynamic. sometimes this divergence becomes half settled in or attains an attachment to an environment or person. a person may be considered to consistently have a certain subtype within a certain environment. between people it is common for subtypes to become more closely matched as time progresses. this is what partly accounts for the "engine run-in" effect that gets mentioned in type relation descriptions sometimes.

however, this being said, most people can not even type accurately enough to type at 16 type accuracy and end up typing even worse when they try to increase the accuracy of their typings further.

please specify clearly that the NF in Ne-ENTp-NF is beta NF, not delta NF. same for all the other pairings.


i still think that the most "useful" result of the taciturn/narrator cycle model is the new interpretation of the relation between look-a-like and comparative types and between semi-duals and illusionaries.

for example: ESTj + ESFj has certain semi-dual-ish features. the ESTj's Te can dualize the ESFj's Fe.

INTj + ESTj can seem like identicality at times. similar way of issuing brief statements of practical certitude.


i can attest from personal experience that dualizing ISTjs and INFjs is a lot of fun, as is beating ESTjs and ENFjs at their own game.

as i have written about previously, the ID functions are the key to personal development. learn to behave like your semi-dual or illusionary for the most successful way of breaking out of a comfort zone. ID functions are NOT about becoming like your contrary. that would be counteractive.