Subtype and process/result dichotomy

[Dalek Caan]

There are some people who claim to have the "access" to pure and true reality, via say, observation or intuition, and they push that view onto everybody else. And that is all the wrong with the world like authoritarianism.

Well...I think it's more complicated than that most of the time, but fair enough. I'm actually a little surprised at your honesty. It's not how these questions typically seem to go on here. I was expecting some kind of verbal fight.

https://www.reddit.com/r/JungianTypo...ult_dichotomy/

https://www.reddit.com/r/JungianTypo...kingdeclaring/

Okay, that's interesting and pretty clever to notice something like that, even if it does seem a little hyper-logical. I'm not sure I understand this very well then, but that poster also says this

First to understand the significance of this dichotomy you must understand that Socionics, unlike most Western approaches to typology, understands information in both Static and Dynamic terms. In western typology if we ask "What kind of information is this?" the answer is Ti, Te, Se etc. In Socionics instead we would describe the information as Ti -> Ne or Se -> Fe, for example. As information is seen as a vector, direction, not just the functions involved, becomes very important. Ne - > Ti is not the same thing as Ti -> Ne. The Process/Result dichotomy describes the direction of information flow between the functions.

@Disturbed
So I guess the answer is, at least in terms of how it's defined, is no?
And as far as asking/declaring goes, ignoring whether I think it makes much sense or not, don't Mirror's share the same asking/declaring dichotomy? So why would it change when theoretically you'd be becoming more of your mirror anyway?

[ooo]

@Disturbed
So I guess the answer is, at least in terms of how it's defined, is no?
And as far as asking/declaring goes, ignoring whether I think it makes much sense or not, don't Mirror's share the same asking/declaring dichotomy? So why would it change when theoretically you'd be becoming more of your mirror anyway?

subtype modifies the content of the functional stacking, so the answer would be yes. process/result are dependent on this order, so the answer should be yes.

[Disturbed]

subtype modifies the content of the functional stacking, so the answer would be yes. process/result are dependent on this order, so the answer should be yes.

It seems to me from what I've observed and know and how I understand things that LSE-Te, LIE-Te, and ILE-Ne are result, while LSE-Si, ILE-Ti, SLE-Ti, LSI-Se, ESI-Se, EIE-Ni, and IEI-Ni are process. Something I don't understand is... subtype changing the process/result dichotomy is seldom mentioned.