Quote Originally Posted by niffer View Post
Based on both these subtype styles (that and Gulenko’s) I do think I fit the Se subtype a lot more when I’m doing well in life, healthy etc., now that I’m reading through them again. Some points of these descriptions seemed very odd though. For instance: “This is a person of action and not reflection.” <— This was a part of the Ti subtype description but not the Se one. Why? Other parts also made it seem unclear as to why inert/contact would exert such an influence on the personality too.

I’m pretty interested in theory and meta or philosophical thought. I spend a lot of time on pondering and daydreaming, fantasizing etc. But according to these subtype descriptions, it makes it more like Se subtype, when that goes against theory. The Ti subtype should be the more theory-oriented, NT-like one.
If neither of those portraits really clicks, then it's fair to disregard them. In my experience, inert SLE is often smiling and trying to charm his conversation partner, while contact SLE is more serious and seemingly practical. Inert subtype is also much more "catlike" in movements