Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Is it possible to be such a pronounced base subtype that your creative is completely unconscious?

  1. #1

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Is it possible to be such a pronounced base subtype that your creative is completely unconscious?

    I figure not. But I'm curious.

    I'm not sure of my type, but my recent 40Q is linked in my signature, so please feel free to check it out.

    I think I'm Ti-leading. I'm not sure of LII or LSI. I don't relate at all to either Ne or Se. In fact, Ti, and a little bit of Fe, are the only elements I relate to in any form. I'm aware of pretty much constantly structuring, classifying, defining.

    I've been into Socionics for years now, almost a decade, but I've never been able to identify anything for sure, other than Ti(Fe).

    I'm not aware of Ni or Si at all. I don't relate to Se PoLR or Ne PoLR, so that's not helpful either.

    I don't see the point of either Ne or Se. All I want to do is conceptualize, theorize, dissect, formulate, classify.

    So now I'm considering one more possible explanation. Ti-leading with such a pronounced Ti subtype that my creative is completely unconscious. Is that plausible?
    Last edited by redundantoxymoron; 02-21-2020 at 03:55 AM.

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    125
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    “Considering one more explanation. Is this plausible...” in other words, is this a potential... this sounds like Ne language.

    https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ation-Elements

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by remiges View Post
    “Considering one more explanation. Is this plausible...” in other words, is this a potential... this sounds like Ne language.

    https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...ation-Elements
    Noted, and I realized that myself as I wrote this post. However, it's very uncommon, unnatural, and uncomfortable for me to evaluate plausibility and potentials. All I want to do is conceptualize, theorize, dissect, formulate, classify. You're seeing a rare exception here.

  4. #4

    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    304
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you're an LSI, then you'd actually be the Sensory "subtype"; the Se type is actually logically stricter and much more conscious of Ti than the Ti type and relates to Fe much better. As I explained earlier, the nomenclature is not great (as in the ILE-Ti having better Ne than the ILE-Ne). I don't know much about LII-Ti. Sorry.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Disturbed View Post
    If you're an LSI, then you'd actually be the Sensory "subtype"; the Se type is actually logically stricter and much more conscious of Ti than the Ti type and relates to Fe much better. As I explained earlier, the nomenclature is not great (as in the ILE-Ti having better Ne than the ILE-Ne). I don't know much about LII-Ti. Sorry.
    No. the Ti subtype is more conscious of Ti.

  6. #6
    now with Corona Virus Protozoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2019
    Posts
    251
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think so.
    The Jungian thought was that if you focus on one aspect of the psyche, there is also a dualistic (or reflected) aspect to it in reality that doesn't have to be realized or just isn't realized -> this he thought of as unconscious and thus the unconscious is formed. So if someone believes certain things are good, they also believe certain things are bad, even if they don't exactly know what those bad things are yet. The purpose of Jungian psychology then is to help people form a more complete understanding of their thoughts and actions, hence the goal being to make the unconscious conscious.

    So let's think about this a bit. Why would say an LIE have both conscious Te and Ni? Well, Jung thought the simplest way of organizing the human psyche came down to perception/judgement (and described as irrational/rational) and objective/subjective (also described as extroverted/introverted). Now I don't really want to get into defining those terms, since Jung did and he did so simply imo and it's easy to find in his psychological types (so anyone can look those up if they care); but LIE being Te focused are then judgement-rational and extroverted-objective, so the opposite, being perceiving-irrational and introverted-subjective, is a dualistic reflection to their psychic focus and could be thought of as unconscious in this regard. But Jung also distinguished perception and judgement into intuition/sensing and feeling/thinking respectively. So a more dualistic aspect to Te is not best represented in Ni or Si, but Fi.

    But...then is Ni conscious in LIE or not? I think for LIE-Te, from a Jungian perspective of making the unconscious conscious, since they are so focused on extroversion, introversion itself becomes much more foreign and unconscious and their Se is easy to bring to consciousness, but not Ni.
    An LIE-Ni is represented by dualistic aspects of introversion and extroversion melding together. They have perhaps made the unconscious conscious and developed their dualistic introverted-subjective side. So for them, Ni could be a natural reflective extension of their Te, a growing of the psyche in a way.

    So to answer the question, yes, I think that not only makes sense, but that it's probably best understood that way as well.
    previously Megadoodoo

  7. #7
    Ajna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    24
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Isn't the creative function supposed to be the way you go about acting in the world? How you go about materialising the wishes of the dominant function?
    I don't think it can be "unconscious" (I don't know what you even mean by that) but it is possible that you may be blind to the obvious so you can't really pinpoint which function you're using.

    I think it's Ne. You seem clearly like a dominant T (not completely sure yet if Ti or Te), but you're missing the point of Ne qualities. Look at your posts and see how open minded you are, I skimmed through it and it's obvious that you can juggle many points of view, for starters. Try reading about quadras.

    Could you also please concisely explain what kind of things do you "structure classify and define"?
    Is your thinking more deductive (apply from theory to practice) or inductive (apply from practice to theory/general principle)?

    What are some things that you are aware you're weak/incapable of but you don't value enough to care for or develop it?

  8. #8

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Is not valuing small things enough to develop them a telltale sign, Ajna?

  9. #9
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,482
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    In rare cases, Ti can be online so much that no other processes get to operate that much but that describes someone who would be largely dysfunctional in many situations. I'm a Ti-subtype with input online around one-third of the time which handicaps me for a lot of social scenarios. Having such a pronounced imbalance as you describe would make the determination of the input preference nearly impossible because in a sense, it wouldn't really be a distinctive enough preference so my description wouldn't likely be all that relatable even if you were LII.......

    http://www.socionics.com/articles/on_being_intj.html

    a.k.a. I/O

  10. #10
    mindless Aeris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Location
    nowhere important
    TIM
    heartless
    Posts
    481
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it's possible to become blind to one's creative. If it disserved you in the past, it can cause you to unconsciously reject it, and even though X type makes sense, it can feel like it's not posdible because your life up until now doesn't follow it.
    Not having a creative is how I felt until last week, just crossed someone who needed it and it somehow made things better.

  11. #11
    a two horned unicorn renegade CoViD Spurdo 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    sniffing your butt
    TIM
    ILE-α/H, LEVF
    Posts
    5,568
    Mentioned
    247 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    the opposite can happen as well. The level how you function can be seen in many viewpoints. There is a concept made by Victor "The Almighty Lord of Structures" Gulenko called accentuated function which can be any of the eight. Too much Ni and you are incurable submerged autistic, too much Ti and you become puritanical bastard, too much Fe and you basically sing in sleep, too much Fi and you are overly attached loser, too much Te and terminator seems like child's play, too much Si and you really know how to poop in style, too much Se and you make everyone in aggression control therapy group shit their pants, too much Ne and you become weirdo just like me.
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

  12. #12
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Maizistan
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    1,337
    Mentioned
    121 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have mostly the opposite experience, if anything. I'm more conscious of using Ne than Ti. I'd assumed that someone is generally unaware of "using" their base function in the same way that you're generally unaware of breathing, while using the creative is like moving a limb -- it might be easy, but it's generally not as automatic; you have to think, however briefly, when you move it.

    Are people generally "aware" of when their base is being used?
    Every man is as God made him, ay, and often worse. - Cervantes

  13. #13
    a two horned unicorn renegade CoViD Spurdo 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    sniffing your butt
    TIM
    ILE-α/H, LEVF
    Posts
    5,568
    Mentioned
    247 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman View Post
    Are people generally "aware" of when their base is being used?
    Usually ignoring function has lots of awareness but there is something going on that extinguishes it. Demonstrative is like magic autopilot [some LII's really make the understanding of Ni piece of art which to me isn't so spectacular while I really drool after comfy Te] while creative seems like adjusted work horse.
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman View Post
    I have mostly the opposite experience, if anything. I'm more conscious of using Ne than Ti. I'd assumed that someone is generally unaware of "using" their base function in the same way that you're generally unaware of breathing, while using the creative is like moving a limb -- it might be easy, but it's generally not as automatic; you have to think, however briefly, when you move it.

    Are people generally "aware" of when their base is being used?
    That's actually what I originally thought, too, but from reading Socionics forums and looking more into theory, it seems that generally, people are more aware of the base than the creative (unless they are creative subtypes).

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    ESI
    Posts
    103
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    In rare cases, Ti can be online so much that no other processes get to operate that much but that describes someone who would be largely dysfunctional in many situations. I'm a Ti-subtype with input online around one-third of the time which handicaps me for a lot of social scenarios. Having such a pronounced imbalance as you describe would make the determination of the input preference nearly impossible because in a sense, it wouldn't really be a distinctive enough preference so my description wouldn't likely be all that relatable even if you were LII.......

    http://www.socionics.com/articles/on_being_intj.html

    a.k.a. I/O
    Yes, I am not sure of my type yet, but I believe I intake information much less than I formulate. I find it hard to just passively take in information; it's much easier for me to move towards somehow formulating or fitting the information into some theory, checking it against other information, etc.

    EDIT:

    So I guess you're LII with 2/3 time Ti and 1/3 time Ne (or Se? But I guess Ne from that article). My question now for you is, wouldn't that just be a normal LII? I do not think the baseline ratio of base-to-creative is 50-50; I think it's about 65-35 or 70-30. So if you're using Ti about 65-70% of the time, which it sounds like you are, then IMO you're a regular LII with no subtype. For comparison, an ILE who used Ti 65-70% of the time would be a Ti subtype.

    How do you define these ratios? I'm genuinely curious btw and interested in discussing more. Thanks.
    Last edited by redundantoxymoron; 02-29-2020 at 04:55 AM.

  16. #16
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,482
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redundantoxymoron View Post
    .......So I guess you're LII with 2/3 time Ti and 1/3 time Ne (or Se? But I guess Ne from that article). My question now for you is, wouldn't that just be a normal LII? I do not think the baseline ratio of base-to-creative is 50-50; I think it's about 65-35 or 70-30. So if you're using Ti about 65-70% of the time, which it sounds like you are, then IMO you're a regular LII with no subtype. For comparison, an ILE who used Ti 65-70% of the time would be a Ti subtype.

    How do you define these ratios? I'm genuinely curious btw and interested in discussing more. Thanks.
    There's a big difference between how much time is spent processing input (Ne) or output (Ti) and what priority is given to each; and priority isn't graduated - INTj output simply has it. Ninety percent of ones time could be spent on Ne but an INTj still gives priority to output. When the rubber hits the road, most of that input is cast aside, and decisions are made or things must be done.

    For all types, the ideal balance between input and output for all social scenarios is 50-50. In some creative situations, high use of Ti can be very advantageous but it can also be equally blinding.........

    a.k.a. I/O

    EDIT. Note that subtypes process information exactly the same (have identical processing structures); being off the 50-50 ratio generally indicates ineffectiveness with certain aspects of information processing.
    Last edited by Rebelondeck; 02-29-2020 at 12:26 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •