Creative subtype a hindrance?

[Ms. Kensington]

I think this could be lumped in with another thread, if one of the mods feels it's better categorized somewhere else feel free to do so.

So, there are a few options to consider. A producing subtype makes you more like your lookalike. Does this mean your program strength goes down and your role up; does it mean you are more aware of your role while the relative strength of the functions stay the same; does it mean that you mesh your role and your program together.

I feel that this could mean something to the "purpose" of finding duals and such to support your first function use for the collective unconscious..

Btw, it doesn't really matter to me how you talk about subtypes; im talking about differences in information processing between people of the same type. The creative function has the same relation to the program regardless of a subtype. Outside focus is outside focus under any name.

[Expat]

So, there are a few options to consider. A producing subtype makes you more like your lookalike. Does this mean your program strength goes down and your role up; does it mean you are more aware of your role while the relative strength of the functions stay the same; does it mean that you mesh your role and your program together.

Yes that's how some people see it. A Ni-ENTj would be similar to a Ni-ENFj, for instance. The Ni-ENTj's Te>Fe preference would be -- buffered even as still existing.

I feel that this could mean something to the "purpose" of finding duals and such to support your first function use for the collective unconscious..

There are many discussions on this -- the most supported view (in terms of people supporting it) is that rational dual subtypes match better, as do the irrational dual subtypes.

[Exodus]

I think creative subtypes get a bad rap. The most general impression I have is that creative subtypes are more...volatile, since they are, vaguely speaking, more interested in producing than accepting.

I like detail's description of subtypes using INTj-Ti vs. INTj-Ne as an example:

http://the16types.info/forums/viewtopic.php?t=10964

If there is anything to that information flow stuff, a good metaphor is that accepting subtypes have a kind of bottleneck when it comes to processing base-function information (and creative subtypes vice versa). That's a plus for creative subtypes IMO, as in the Ti stuff is mostly instant for me (although maybe a bit sloppy) - it goes directly to Ne output.

I feel that this could mean something to the "purpose" of finding duals and such to support your first function use for the collective unconscious..

What do you mean?

[krieger]

I don't believe in creative subtypes.

[Exodus]

I don't believe in creative subtypes.

Classical socionics: LII - C subtype

C = creative, no?

[krieger]

No sir. That's Gulenko's DCNH subtype system. The less elaborately explored version of dual-type theory that the russions do acknowledge.

C subtype = Ep exertion type.