Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011
Results 401 to 417 of 417

Thread: Short typing video

  1. #401

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    263
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northstar View Post
    It's a mess but also a collection of different perspectives and layers.
    Yeah if only it all wasn't confined into 8 small boxes of IEs.


    Like I've explained before, I see my information metabolism as being clearly SLE > LSI (extroversion > introversion, perception first). However, in the energy metabolism department I could see a DCNH subtype like N for "IJ" type of terminating behavior. The other terminating subtype would be D(ominating). That could fit too, but as pseudo-temperament I feel "IJ" is a bit closer than "EJ". Obviously, DCNH probably isn't the best and final subtype system but theoretically it's a bit more sound than the inert/contact subtype system, IMO. In that one I'd be SLE-Ti.
    It's important to make the distinction in TEM and TIM, otherwise you'll do a lot of simple mistypings due to putting too much weight on "surface temperament".

    One way to put it with "introverted extroverts" and "extroverted introverts" is that you notice the surface temperament first, but the longer you interact or observe said person, the more they start to seem like their actual TIM. I seem introverted at first but keep accelerating and increasing contact, whereas people that are extroverted introverts initially seem more extroverted but soon run out of steam and start to retreat into themselves and need to recharge.
    I don't know, I seem introverted at first, then I do this accelerating and increasing contact* etc stuff. But then after a while I enjoy a chance to be alone or unengaged again. I don't *need* to recharge per se, but it's still nice to disengage sometimes.

    *: Btw wasn't Normalizing a distant rather than contact subtype;

    * contact, terminal, connecting - dominant subtype (D);
    * contact, initial, ignoring - creative subtype (C);
    * distant, terminal, ignoring - normalizing subtype (N);
    * distant, initial, connecting - harmonizing subtype (H).




    Yeah, he's clearly more introverted in terms of information metabolism. He goes deeper into one thing instead of spreading a wide net of interests compared to me. Thinks over things a lot more before acting and in general just seems to act slower. Around introverts I often feel like my "clock speed" is way too high and I get impatient when they keep thinking and don't respond. As a result they make less mistakes than I do, but in the same timeframe that they make the one correct decision, I've had time to make and fix a couple of incorrect ones, still arriving at the correct result faster. He's way more process-oriented, doing things in the "correct order" and not branching out to doing something else until he's done with a particular sub-task. I jump between different things depending on what I feel like doing, though eventually tying all the loose ends but in a completely random order. He's sequential.
    Is the bolded true for IEIs too?

    What makes you type him Se subtype?

  2. #402

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    263
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Also when you do those certain things with predictable systematic ways of working with stuff, do you not stay with it (in a sequential way) instead of jumping to something else?

  3. #403
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grumpyvic81 View Post
    Yeah if only it all wasn't confined into 8 small boxes of IEs.




    I don't know, I seem introverted at first, then I do this accelerating and increasing contact* etc stuff. But then after a while I enjoy a chance to be alone or unengaged again. I don't *need* to recharge per se, but it's still nice to disengage sometimes.

    *: Btw wasn't Normalizing a distant rather than contact subtype;

    * contact, terminal, connecting - dominant subtype (D);
    * contact, initial, ignoring - creative subtype (C);
    * distant, terminal, ignoring - normalizing subtype (N);
    * distant, initial, connecting - harmonizing subtype (H).






    Is the bolded true for IEIs too?

    What makes you type him Se subtype?
    Yeah, Contact would kinda make sense according to the theory. I don't freeze in times of stress, I get more agitated but probably too much so that it decreases my effectiveness. So not sure how to judge that.
    Connecting/ignoring as paying attention to the external environment is difficult to judge. I'm not ruling out Dominant subtype either, but as a whole Normalizing also seems plausible.

    IEI don't go that much into their heads during an active discussion because of their Je, as compared to LII and LSI for example. They can be pretty rapid-fire for a while but then need to retreat and recharge, which is okay because I know they'll be back.
    They're typically the extroverted introverts, especially Fe-heavy subtypes.

    The LSI-Se (or Creative) fits that description very well, definitely not Normalizing. It's again an obvious contrast to another friend who is an obvious LSI-Normalizing (or Ti sub).

  4. #404

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    263
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northstar View Post
    Yeah, Contact would kinda make sense according to the theory. I don't freeze in times of stress, I get more agitated but probably too much so that it decreases my effectiveness. So not sure how to judge that.
    Connecting/ignoring as paying attention to the external environment is difficult to judge. I'm not ruling out Dominant subtype either, but as a whole Normalizing also seems plausible.

    IEI don't go that much into their heads during an active discussion because of their Je, as compared to LII and LSI for example. They can be pretty rapid-fire for a while but then need to retreat and recharge, which is okay because I know they'll be back.
    They're typically the extroverted introverts, especially Fe-heavy subtypes.

    The LSI-Se (or Creative) fits that description very well, definitely not Normalizing. It's again an obvious contrast to another friend who is an obvious LSI-Normalizing (or Ti sub).
    So with the same Fe egos around or whatever good company around, he has to go and recharge way faster than you?

  5. #405
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grumpyvic81 View Post
    So with the same Fe egos around or whatever good company around, he has to go and recharge way faster than you?
    Hmm yeah, now that you mention it I think so. He seems to have more of a need to retreat and usually when hanging out he's the one that leaves first. I'm always among the last ones remaining during a night out. The "Ti sub" guy doesn't do nights out at all.

  6. #406

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    263
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northstar View Post
    Hmm yeah, now that you mention it I think so. He seems to have more of a need to retreat and usually when hanging out he's the one that leaves first. I'm always among the last ones remaining during a night out. The "Ti sub" guy doesn't do nights out at all.
    Does he leave to be with his family, though?

    Also (still comparing all this with LSI-Se) when you do those certain things with predictable systematic ways of working with stuff, do you not stay with it (in a sequential way) instead of jumping to something else?

  7. #407
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grumpyvic81 View Post
    Does he leave to be with his family, though?

    Also (still comparing all this with LSI-Se) when you do those certain things with predictable systematic ways of working with stuff, do you not stay with it (in a sequential way) instead of jumping to something else?
    Lol, no. He just tires of interaction.

    I don't really know what you mean by that, you're getting too specific at his point. I just notice patterns that I tend to do things much the same way when I repeat a task, use similar naming schemes for things and so on. It depends on my mood, If I feel like doing something then I could stick with it to the end. If not, I'll switch to something more interesting and switch back later. I prefer to postpone stuff I don't feel like doing at the moment.

  8. #408

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE
    Posts
    263
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northstar View Post
    Lol, no. He just tires of interaction.

    I don't really know what you mean by that, you're getting too specific at his point. I just notice patterns that I tend to do things much the same way when I repeat a task, use similar naming schemes for things and so on. It depends on my mood, If I feel like doing something then I could stick with it to the end. If not, I'll switch to something more interesting and switch back later. I prefer to postpone stuff I don't feel like doing at the moment.
    OK it's just if I had a family, I'd be more likely to leave early too.


    And well I was just trying to see how his being sequential would be different from your way of being methodical, tho' you originally didn't consider yourself methodical. This here btw didn't sound like you are a terminating subtype as you do switch to other things instead of finishing.

    Sorry I'm not trying to be nitpicky, I realise all this shit is messy anyway, that's normal like I said

  9. #409
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by grumpyvic81 View Post
    OK it's just if I had a family, I'd be more likely to leave early too.


    And well I was just trying to see how his being sequential would be different from your way of being methodical, tho' you originally didn't consider yourself methodical. This here btw didn't sound like you are a terminating subtype as you do switch to other things instead of finishing.

    Sorry I'm not trying to be nitpicky, I realise all this shit is messy anyway, that's normal like I said
    Nah, you need to get out sometimes and then you want to do it properly instead of getting home too early. Anyway, most of those experiences were before kids, we've known each other for more than a decade.

    I don't think methodical is a fitting word. I seldom follow a procedure or process, it's just getting shit done fast and roughly right. The difference in him is that compared to me he works slower and more carefully. Often cleaning and polishing things and getting it "just right" aesthetically. I don't have the patience, I just want results quickly and can't be bothered with cleaning up. I'd rather pay someone to do that boring stuff. For example, he likes to do careful painting and metalwork, I can't concentrate on that stuff. I often inadvertently cause damage by being too rough.

    For me, the terminating part means that eventually you want to finish things instead of constantly just starting new stuff and leaving it unfinished. That does happen but I still try to return and finish up and leave no loose ends. It just might happen much later down the line. I don't like starting way too many initiatives without closing down the existing ones.

    Putting them into more famliar terms, I've seen contact/distancing as a representation of extroversion/introversion within a type. terminating/initiating as a the scale of rationality/irrationality within a type. Finally, ignoring/connecting as scale of static/dynamic within a type.

    I identify with being somewhat towards introverted, rational and static within these scales inside my type. Usually in dichotomy tests (MBTI and Socionics) I tend to fall close to the middle of E/I dichotomy, clearly to the P side of P/J dichotomy (but not at the very end). I haven't seen many tests for static/dynamic but I would describe myself as more ignoring than sensitive to changes in environment. I'm not very attached to my environment and can easily uproot myself and move elsewhere, not getting homesick or missing familiar things. I don't decorate my home and pay little attention to its coziness.

    As for the friend for comparison, while I've described him as Creative (or -Se, more extroverted/contact) subtype, it might be possible that he's Dominant subtype as well. Contact subtype is certain, but I could see terminating dichotomy for him too. And, connecting instead of ignoring due to him paying much more attention to the cleanliness and presentability of his house, yard and garage. I'm certain he isn't a normalizing or harmonizing LSI, anyway.
    In case he is D sub and I'm N sub, it would fit to good relations since that is "DCNH duality" as in compatible subtypes.

    Putting this in practice, a LSI-D might look like LSE on the surface but LSI would come into focus with further observation. The same with SLE-N looking like LSI on the surface but digging deeper SLE would soon become obvious.

  10. #410
    Tetrisexual inaLim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    170
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Connecting would be everything dynamic. Te, Fe, Ni, & Si. Changes in the environment means something like physical comfort when you're talking about Si, but it also means social maneuvering (Fe), work activity (Te), and trajectory/patterns of events (Ni).

  11. #411
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Yeah, that would make sense considering what functions are accentuated with connecting DCNH subtypes.

    Then again, this (http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?t..._Vera_Borisova) states:
    Subtype-forming qualities have no relation to socionic dichotomies (both the principal dichotomies and Reinin ones).
    The essence of the scale connecting / ignoring is in the principle of contact / feedback from the environment: connector independently establishes connections, strives to hold onto them, attaches, reacts not as much to the positive than the negative impulses, in an effort to convert them ("why is he not paying attention to me? he must be engaged!"); ignorer operates on the principle of mirror response: "as you react to me, so do I react to you". V. Gulenko used the scale terminating / initiating for distinguishing two subtypes, correlating it with the strengthening of the 1st function (terminal subtype) or 2nd function (initial subtype) [5]. The main difference, however, is that the initial subtype starts (initiates, triggers), and his performance is higher at the beginning but to complete the work difficult for him. For the terminal subtype it's more difficult to start on something, but towards the end of his performance increases.


    Seems like terminating and ignoring would fit me. That leaves only normalizing on the table. With a slight possibility for creative considering how sure I'm about being ignoring vs connecting and terminating vs initiating.

  12. #412

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11,801
    Mentioned
    1080 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  13. #413
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    You think I'd enjoy that movie, or what do you mean? I kinda liked the Vikings series although I didn't watch more than a few episodes, I rarely have the patience to sit and watch movies or series without starting to do something else at the same time.

  14. #414
    Tetrisexual inaLim's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2019
    TIM
    SLE-Ti 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    170
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Northstar View Post
    Yeah, that would make sense considering what functions are accentuated with connecting DCNH subtypes.

    Then again, this (http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?t..._Vera_Borisova) states:
    Subtype-forming qualities have no relation to socionic dichotomies (both the principal dichotomies and Reinin ones).
    The essence of the scale connecting / ignoring is in the principle of contact / feedback from the environment: connector independently establishes connections, strives to hold onto them, attaches, reacts not as much to the positive than the negative impulses, in an effort to convert them ("why is he not paying attention to me? he must be engaged!"); ignorer operates on the principle of mirror response: "as you react to me, so do I react to you". V. Gulenko used the scale terminating / initiating for distinguishing two subtypes, correlating it with the strengthening of the 1st function (terminal subtype) or 2nd function (initial subtype) [5]. The main difference, however, is that the initial subtype starts (initiates, triggers), and his performance is higher at the beginning but to complete the work difficult for him. For the terminal subtype it's more difficult to start on something, but towards the end of his performance increases.


    Seems like terminating and ignoring would fit me. That leaves only normalizing on the table. With a slight possibility for creative considering how sure I'm about being ignoring vs connecting and terminating vs initiating.

    Unless Gulenko retracted or revised his theory, he approached it from the POV of both dichotomies and functions (Holographic Panoramic Ne)

    Connecting / Ignoring "is the subtype refinement of the classical dichotomy static/dynamic."
    Terminating / Initiating "is a concretization of the dichotomy rationality/irrationality"

    "Strengthening the linear-assertive functions , whatever position this pair occupies within the framework of the sociomodel, forms a dominant subtype (D)."
    "Strengthening the receptive-adaptive functions engenders a harmonizing subtype (H)."


    (I don't speak Russian or have Gulenko's book, so maybe he changed it)


    I agree terminating fits how you describe yourself. I'm not sure your idea of connecting is accurate if you pick and choose Borisova instead of Gulenko. DCNH is already fringe socionics, now we're even further out into someone else's interpretation of DCNH.


    http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?t..._DCNH_Subtypes


    System of DCNH Subtypes
    Viktor Gulenko, 2006.The problem of intra-type differences

    Why are people of one type so different? This question has long disturbed every sober-minded practitioner of socionics. How can two carriers of one and the same psychological system, which has an identical structure, demonstrate in one and the same situation such different modes of behavior?


    Conduct a simple experiment. Gather 3-4 people of a single type, it is unimportant which type their school’s specialist determined. Give them any mutually accessible task (a jointly solved intellectual puzzle or a game or such) and observe their behavior. You will see that in spite of their identical type, some of them will be more active, others more passive, some more resourceful, others more conservative and so on. The most interesting thing is that the greater the number of representatives of the same type gathered, the greater the number of differences will you reveal between them. Thus the depth of the typology is possible to increase even further.

    The situation is comparable to holding a stamp in your hands, which does not change in the course of time, yet creates a different imprint with every use. So it is, within the psyche of a real person - a carrier of a type - there is always present, in effect, an admixture of some other type. Here I call this admixture "subtype," or variation of the type.

    Recall isomerism – the ability of a chemical compound, without changing its composition, to form substances with different properties. Subtypes are nothing more than unique psychological isomers. The existence of varieties of a type is a completely normal phenomenon within the framework of a biological outline.

    I proposed long ago a sufficiently systematic solution to the problem of intra-type differences near the end of the 1980s. In this report I would like to present a contemporary appraisal of the problem.

    Purely theoretically, the subtype problem can be solved in two ways.

    The first way lies through the introduction of special dichotomies. With respect to the customary common type dichotomies, they bear a more concrete nature, thus coming out as lower level factors. I call this procedure combinatorial-dichotomous.


    The alternate path examines the strengthening of various functions within the framework of the classical sociomodel (Model A). The fact is that the manifestation (and development) of a function is not [always] equal to its position – its hierarchical place within the structure of the psyche. In spite of being equally located, i.e. occupying one and the same position in the sociomodel, functions can have completely different degrees of manifestation. This arrangement, according to the tenets of this approach, forms the subtype’s special behavioral features. This concept, in contrast to the combinatorial-dichotomous approach mentioned above, can be named functional-positional.





    Three pairs of dichotomies

    First dichotomy: contacting/distancing.
    The first pole of this dichotomy represents the predominance of the need for contact and interaction, and the second pole represents the need to distance. Clearly expressed extroverts, as well as extroverted introverts, fall into the "contacting" category. Clearly expressed introverts, as well as introverted extroverts – those extroverts who avoid intensive contact – fall into the distancing category. The scale of vertness is thus split into four inner gradations.
    Contact / Distant is basically social vs reclusive; MBTI extroversion / MBTI introversion.

    Second dichotomy: terminating/initiating.I understand "terminating" as the ability to finish what was started and a tendency towards ordering/regulation, and "initiating" as the opposite tendency to initiate and to easily move on to something else, with an accompanying disorder in matters and affairs. As you see, this is a concretization of the already familiar to the reader dichotomy rationality/irrationality. It would be incorrect to think that pristine order reigns in the house of any person of rational type, that this person very clearly plans everything, and that any person of irrational type throws around his things and gets burdened by planning. In reality, between two of these extreme poles there are two more intervening gradations.

    Clearly expressed rationals and orderly irrationals belong to the "terminating" pole, while clearly expressed irrationals and disorderly rationals belong to the "initiating" pole.
    Terminal / Initial is something like what MBTI wants J / P to mean.

    And the third additional dichotomy is connecting/ignoring.
    The basis for this scale is assumed to be the level of sensitivity to changes in the environment. Connectors are very sensitive to such changes, whereas ignorers, as the name suggests, are capable of not paying any attention to this. This polarity is the subtype refinement of the classical dichotomy static/dynamic.
    Strengthening the linear-assertive functions , whatever position this pair occupies within the framework of the sociomodel, forms a dominant subtype (D).
    Strengthening the receptive-adaptive functions
    engenders a harmonizing subtype (H).
    Implicit relation between dynamic and connecting


  15. #415
    Northstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    TIM
    SLE (N) 8w9 sx/sp
    Posts
    637
    Mentioned
    64 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by inaLim View Post
    Unless Gulenko retracted or revised his theory, he approached it from the POV of both dichotomies and functions (Holographic Panoramic Ne)

    Connecting / Ignoring "is the subtype refinement of the classical dichotomy static/dynamic."
    Terminating / Initiating "is a concretization of the dichotomy rationality/irrationality"

    "Strengthening the linear-assertive functions , whatever position this pair occupies within the framework of the sociomodel, forms a dominant subtype (D)."
    "Strengthening the receptive-adaptive functions engenders a harmonizing subtype (H)."


    (I don't speak Russian or have Gulenko's book, so maybe he changed it)


    I agree terminating fits how you describe yourself. I'm not sure your idea of connecting is accurate if you pick and choose Borisova instead of Gulenko. DCNH is already fringe socionics, now we're even further out into someone else's interpretation of DCNH.


    http://wikisocion.net/en/index.php?t..._DCNH_Subtypes

















    Contact / Distant is basically social vs reclusive; MBTI extroversion / MBTI introversion.



    Terminal / Initial is something like what MBTI wants J / P to mean.





    Implicit relation between dynamic and connecting

    Yeah I didn't really buy into that Borisova claim, it doesn't seem likely that these dichotomies would be completely decoupled from Reinin, for example.

    Google also found this interesting post on DCNH: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/commen...ubtype_system/

    Even more food for thought, and links to Gulenko's articles (google translate works):
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JungianTypo...ems_resources/
    https://www.reddit.com/r/JungianTypo...ypes_and_a_32/

    I did the little pen and paper test (this was actually linked before on another thread here), and got SLE, with 3/5 for initiating and 2/5 for terminating. Exactly the same as I got in the web-based test, actually. So there maybe wasn't anything wrong with that test after all, @ergot

    The descriptions afterwards imply that Initiating is the creative subtype (SLE-Ti) and Terminating is the inert subtype (SLE-Se).

    In the list of descriptions from the first link, C seems more fitting than N. Underlined things I like about them for myself:


    Dominant:
    Uses Te and Fe outside of their basic roles for their type. This subtype has the highest similarity with it's base type description because of the emphasis on the dominant function. This is the most ambitious and driven subtype often taking on leadership roles and the lest comfortable with following orders if they don't align with their existing goals. They like structure because it help them efficiently achieve their goals but they don't have the patience to figure out all the details. As a result they are surprisingly good at following the Normalizing's subtype demands and instructions. They are the most self motivating but often they are unsuccessful in meeting their ambitions because of their inflexible nature and lack of patience for details.

    The Dominant subtype relies on it's dominant function even more then it's usual for a type inserting it in to every aspect of their life. Their ambitious goals also revolve around this function and the wish to get some sort of social recognition for their skill an effort in the domain of their dominant. Because of the emphasis on the dominant function weaker functions are often ignored by this type leading to a rather rigid and limited approach to problem-solving.


    Normalizer:

    Uses Ti and Fi outside of their basic roles for their type. Highest priority is order and structure in the personal space. What that structure is applied to depends on the type, for example Fe doms will show a Ji like obsession with rules and consistency in social relations while an Si dom is more like to be highly particular about their physical space. However even Normalizers with vulnerable Si will have strong preferences for how theyr things are arranged. It's important to note that the "order" might not look like anything to an outside observer but move one thing out of place and you'll quickly find out you're dealing with a Normalizing subtype. They rarely show ambition or initiative but are energized when presented with clear goals and objectives. Normalizers will almost always practice what they preach implementing in their lives the same order they demand of others. This along with their focus on their counterbalancing weaker functions makes them the most adaptive and self-reliant type.

    The Normalizing subtype emphases it's role function (the shadow of the inferior) even though it's uncomfortable. They tend to resent people who make them assume use their Role however ("Why do I have to do everything? If people just did thing the RIGHT way this wouldn't happen?").


    Harmonizing:
    Uses Ni and Si outside of their basic roles for their type. On first examination the Harmonizing subtype seems to have non of his type usual social imperfections instead giving of a vibe of soft a appropriate "social appropriateness". They are easily made uncomfortable by social conflict and will act in a self sacrificial manner to restore harmony. Their nature can be mistaken for being an Fe users by those who believe Fe = selflessness. A Harmonizing ESTJ, for example will always be around to get a friend out of trouble or help them figure out their life (Adam Braverman from "Parenthood. Harmonizers combine social grace with subtlety being able to lead a social situation to a desired outcome without alienating others.
    The Harmonizing subtype is more willing to use their vulnerable function (the shadow of the tertiary) then any other subtype. This is often done in a self-sacrificial manner in the service of others.



    Creative:
    Uses Ne and Se outside of their basic roles for their type. Most flexible subtype so most of the time they are the least similar to their type description. They show similarities with their mirror type (INTP with ENTP for example). They usually put a lot of effort towards their hobbies or other creative activities. Their projects are treated as something personal and they show lite interest towards publicizing or sharing the results of their work with others. They prefer to start new personal projects rather than cooperate and maintain the work of others. If having to maintain something started by another person they will try to remake and improve the original. When something hinders them personally they simply renounce it, ignoring it and distancing themselves from it. Because of the focus on personal actualization this type often struggles with adapting to societies or the groups expectations.

    The Creative subtype uses their Auxialry function then any other subtype using it as much as the dominant most of the time. This is done in the service of their own personal projects and interests.



    It's also interesting that this post says:
    The subtypes represent a continuum. A person can have any position along the edges of the diamond (so you could be somewhere between Creative and Dominant). One of the subtypes will usually be more prominent however. As subtypes are an adaptation to certain social environments they change during a person's life. A regular person will go through at least two subtypes in their lifetime but a lot more changes than that are possible.

    Something in-between C and N could make sense as I've from the start identified with both of these subtypes. C fits best out of this post's descriptions. Analyzing the three DCNH dichotomies it seems like falling in between for contact/distance and terminating/initiating but pretty clearly into ignoring (which is the shared dichotomy for N and C).

  16. #416
    ergot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    199
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DCHN is in flux, that's interesting. but not helping my thoughts which are still muddled - identifying who is who in look-alike relations.

    say you are hanging out in your super ego block due to outer quadra family or line of work, can the end result be considered your "true" DCHN type? maybe yes; that's your adapted type that you're moving thru life with.

    consider ILE-C, strengthened (their role) and
    then SLE-C, strengthened (their role) and

    also SEI-H, strengthened (their role) and
    IEI-H , strengthened (their role) and

    where one ends the other begins, ouroboros-like

    LSI-C would be wildhaha

  17. #417
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    2,501
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ergot View Post
    DCHN is in flux, that's interesting. but not helping my thoughts which are still muddled - identifying who is who in look-alike relations.

    say you are hanging out in your super ego block due to outer quadra family or line of work, can the end result be considered your "true" DCHN type? maybe yes; that's your adapted type that you're moving thru life with.

    consider ILE-C, strengthened (their role) and
    then SLE-C, strengthened (their role) and

    also SEI-H, strengthened (their role) and
    IEI-H , strengthened (their role) and

    where one ends the other begins, ouroboros-like

    LSI-C would be wildhaha
    Dcnh is more like another layer on top of model A. So its kindof independent from model a function positions. Ive met LSI-C, they are just like other creative subtypes.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)


    My Pinterest

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 7891011

Posting Permissions

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