.
knowing your subtype strength?
.
Last edited by persimmonism; 07-22-2021 at 08:08 PM.
It's probably from the test on sociotype.com, but there is no real subtype strength; everyone is either one subtype or the other.
There no useful theory of subtypes. Forget it.
Just take into account that Jung type is _one of_ important traits.
> I'm wondering how did you decide what the strength of the subtype was?
They may assume by muddy subtypes descriptions, what dichotomies look as not very expressed, tests. But when are often mistypings (~50%, seen by typing matches), to understand nuances of functions strenghtes is more doubtful.
Also problems are that the functions balance may be not stable and there is no good theory to use this.
DCNH becomes clearer when you are in a group:Originally Posted by chocolatte
It's pretty hard to resist these tendencies when you have other subtypes around. You get forced into your own subtype. That way you can observe your own strengths more objectively.
- Dominating in the sphere of primary needs generates a group role of the motivator (psychologists call this the informal leader) [Dominant subtype-primary], while dominating along the axis of secondary needs creates the role of the mover, or the engine (a formal leader) [Dominant subtype - secondary].
- Creativeness along the primary axis creates for itself the role of the contactor, while creativess along the sphere of secondary needs creates the group role of the innovator.
- Normalizing along the primary axis produces role of the conscience of the group, while normalizing along the secondary creates the role of the coordinator.
- And finally, harmonizing along the axis of primary needs leads to the role of the designer, or layout artist who creates a form through managing different aspects, while harmonizing along secondary needs leads to the role of the expert.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Balance is best. The brain has only so much processing power so in order to get stronger at input processing, output processing has to suffer, or vice versa - robbing Peter to pay Paul so to speak. Subtypes are people of imbalance and have less overall processing efficiency. I certainly wouldn't brag about subtype strengths because there has to be a big hole somewhere. I'm a very Ti-subtype, which is a strength for a very narrow range of activities.
a.k.a. I/O
So if there's a subtype, your opinion is that the extra gain in input prcessing, for example, doesn't proper;y make up for the loss in output processing?
They are from the main dcnh aryicle by gulenko. See the article section under "dcnh"
Im not sure if that H description is that good. But if you are for example an N and you interact with D then its really hard not to start "normalizing". It becomes more evident than when you are alone.
I dont know anything about the 2 subtype system. I do t like it.
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
Also, there is no subtype strength, because the two subtypes for each main type really just portray and emphasize other characteristics much more than they emphasize how well their base or creative functions or even how much they use it (e.g., ILE-Ti have more original, bigger, ideas that can stand the test of time, that are more "out there", and are more likely to revolutionize the world with an invention of a device or social movement than the Ne subtype is and the SLE-Ti also has more volitional power/ability to motivate and really stir things up than the SLE-Se and the Ti subtype is better with Fe, makes more jokes is more playful than the Se subtype and has better aesthetic taste)
Correct. The best mix for most situations is 50-50 and we really start being a subtype at around 67-33. There are very limited numbers of situations where being a subtype can be a real asset but there are usually things noticeably missing from various subtypes that significantly diminish overall processing capabilities.
a.k.a. I/O
Edit: Unlike type, subtype may be alterable although it could be like trying to kick a really bad habit.
Last edited by Rebelondeck; 08-14-2020 at 09:42 PM.
the test from sociotype.com give you your subtype and its strength.
I'm not sure if it can change or drastically change, but I used to score SLI- 1Te and then I started scoring SLI- 0 (No subtype).
I think both are correct somehow. I think I was more Te before and now I'm more 0, after the process of dualizing with IEE-Ne. Before I used to hang out a lot with EII, so that also matches with Te subtype.
Last edited by Mila; 08-15-2020 at 04:32 AM.
"All nations will place their hope in him."
(Mt 12:21)
@Tommy, my SLI-Te ex (whom you strongly resemble) started testing as an SEI when she was pregnant with our kid. She was somehow adapting to the situation by becoming more "mother-like". About a year after he was born, she was back to being an SLI-Te.
I think we adapt ourselves to our environments, whether they be a child or a BF. But it's an adaptation.
Here is an SEI-0 or SEI-1Si who sings in a band (a very Fe activity). When she's singing in wigs, she is channeling an SEI-Fe woman I work with. When she's sitting around with her ILE-Ne husband in the video, she's SEI-Si.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZNYDzNGB-Q
I didn't know socionics before 2017, but I started testing as 1 Te and after a couple of years I started scoring as 0 (no subtype). Looking back, it's probably true that I'm no subtype. I think I had a more Te period during university years and a bit after.That makes a lot of senseHow much time passed for your shift, do you think?
The only source of Se in my life is my ESI mom, and otherwise I hang out with an excessive amount of Ne users.
I guess then if I start spending time with more balanced company (balanced with my personality) I would naturally become more IEI 0
It was probably due oxytocin.
I think subtype/ lack of subtype gets ingrained at some point as you’re growing up..not sure how much of this we can change but think you can definitely even it out more than it is..for me that would feel healthy. Or for someone with no subtype maybe they need to learn how to strengthen both subtype parts of themselves..So people with a subtype gain more balance and people with no subtype gain more depth to their personality? Something like that :s
Even if that ‘depth’ is simply the ability to understand the crazy people with subtypes around them a bit more haha
are we insane, is that what you're saying?!
On the "look inside" page at Amazon for Gulenkos new book [https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/16...ie=UTF8&psc=1], where there is a page from Gulenko's tons of info on IEI, I culled the following IEI VI info, where Gulenko refers to differences between the Ni and the Fe subtypes"
"The most characteristic feature, which makes it possible to assume with certainly that a person belongs to this sociotype, is an elegant appearance....
...The second feature relates to gait and figure. Figures of IEI can be both thin and quite full*, and the more developed the intuitive component [Ni], the more pronounced the propensity to fullness. ..
A more emotional [Fe] version of IEI is easily recognized by vigorous gestures. The eyes are typically narrow, but the intuitive subtypes eyes are wide and curious...."
*[I actually never saw a full-figured IEI. Does anyone have any examples?]
In this book, Gulenko goes on at length about the four DCNH subtypes for IEI (and also for all 16 types) in really interesting detail, though I haven't had it long enough to study it, and can't study it right now. After it came I skimmed it eagerly and now I look forward to having time for in-depth reading. It was not a cheap book, about $30, and I just got rid of 2/3rds of my beloved books, books that survived many previous culling, so it was hard to do, and to add one was a big deal. But it was worth it to finally have a book, and not just the internet, for this topic.
____
P.S. A question comes to mind about subtypes. I see validated the idea of both kinds of subtypes existing, the typical two and the DCNH as well. My question is, is it generally thought that, for example with IEI, that the Fe type could possibly be ANY of the four DCNH types, and the Ni type the same, making there be, essentially EIGHT kinds of IEIs?
So Gulenko's book goes into depth for the DCNH subtypes for each type, going into long descriptions of the four for each type, bringing it to 64 descriptions altogether in his book. So if each of these cold also be either of the other two subtype divisions as well, that brings us up to 128 types!Then add in factors from Enneagram, Western and Chinese astrology, and more - and we can see how the complaint that you cannot stereotype all people into "only" 16 types doesn't really hold water...
Last edited by Eliza Thomason; 08-15-2020 at 08:43 PM.
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
no I’m just messin. I think people with no subtype or ‘balanced subtype’ may come across as more ‘balanced’, mentally healthy people..(a bit like people with certain enneagram tritypes like 369 if you know about enneagram). Maybe they are healthier but what I mean is they’re still gonna have to develop relationships with people with unbalanced subtypes so there’s stuff they need to develop relationship wise at least to reach those people. Maybe I’m wrong, maybe they’re just super cool, balanced people who find relationships easier haha.are we insane, is that what you're saying?!
But I also see subtype as existing on a spectrum as other people have said. So you might lean slightly towards one/ relate to bits of both..and that is what probably makes you unique! And will give you some unique strengths. I’m starting to read more about enneagram tritype which is another way to learn about subtype parts of your personality...enneagram and socionics cross over a lot. It’s a bit easier to digest for me than socionics although wasn’t at first..
I don’t think it’s a bad thing to relate to one subtype more than the other, I think most people probably do. But I think we usually relate to bits of the other subtype too. And subtype is more flexible than core type..it can change, somewhat. You can compare it to enneagram, with their ideas about tritype, integration, wings we ‘pull’ on...parts of our personalities are more fixed than others...but we probably have the potential to change quite a lot given favourable circumstances or some good luckSorry if my thoughts are jumbled, I partied last night lol
um but yeah I generally I agree it’s not good to too lean too much to one subtype or another..but I think we have to figure out the right balance for ourselves or we kinda know it instinctively..even if it’s a vague impression. I think even if I had been mentally healthier throughout my life I might still be a ni subtype..but with a bit more fe.
Last edited by Bethanyclaire; 08-16-2020 at 02:19 PM.
I’m just having a look at this article which seems interesting: https://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...-DCNH-Subtypeshttps://www.the16types.info/vbulleti...-DCNH-Subtypes
Off topic but got me thinking..if DCNH is real..could compatible DCNH subtypes be possibly a high indicator of relationship success? So it would improve non-duality relationships?
The above article also comments on relationship compatibility actually.
hmm am I being convinced by DCNH..? Ahh
Last edited by Bethanyclaire; 08-16-2020 at 05:05 PM.
dcnh is a big factor in relationships. You can see it everywhere. You can say that it improves non-optimal relationships, but it also confuses them, because then there is a conflict between the socionics relation and dcnh. But dcnh compatibility is more on the surface. They constitute different layers of compatibility. There are also other factors, like enneagram (whatever it really is).
The decisive thing is not the reality of the object, but the reality of the subjective factor, i.e. the primordial images, which in their totality represent a psychic mirror-world. It is a mirror, however, with the peculiar capacity of representing the present contents of consciousness not in their known and customary form but in a certain sense sub specie aeternitatis, somewhat as a million-year old consciousness might see them.
(Jung on Si)
yeah I think you are right..I’ve got a suspicion that most dual couples which work in reality are not the ones who feel an intense connection at first (and this can happen). For duality to work in reality maybe some form of chemistry really does have to give. For example, when it comes to enneagram instinct stacking, it seems to me I have the best romantic and to an extent friendship chemistry with sx/so, and I am
so/sx..from what I’ve read and observed it seems having these flipped stacks in this way does seem popular for relationships. But I don’t think it’s common in duality?! I think however DCNH compatibility probably is common in duality.
I think you are doing a better job of handling this massive amount of info than I am. I don't even get what primary/secondary is, though see it in the link I just checked out, to the Gulenko article that you refer to. Yup, that's a lot type subdivisions! I think I will do better at grasping it, while also not keeling over dizzy, if I first deep-study the book, getting a solid understanding of the 64 types and a knowledge of the patterns therein before I entertain breaking them down further!Thank you for your reply! I've wanted to buy Gulenko's book for a while now.. but I'd rather hold off until i am out of my parents' house as my mother would accuse me of being too obsessed with learning about "psychology" rather than actually interacting with people(though I do interact with people plenty)
That's funny- I have literally been called graceful or elegant looking by multiple of my friends. Though I don't know if Gulenko means "elegant" in the sense of natural appearance, or if he refers to how the IEI chooses to dress themself.
When I am in very comfortable company and my Fe really comes out, I noticed recently (unsuspecting photos taken by others) that my eyes do get very narrow, more than I imagined in my mind. Betas supposedly have very wide smiles, and when I see the pictures of where my eyes narrow a lot it almost feels like the same thing, but with the eyes/eyebrow area (horizontally wide).
These past few years I've been clued in to the fact that people find me intimidating (and aloof) due to my expression/appearance (in addition to my personality i guess) so I've tried to remedy that by remembering to always raise my eyebrows a bit.. when they lower I do look positively angry. Otherwise I definitely have that curious wide eyed thing going on.
I was reading the Gulenko article about DCNH and he does actually classify it into 8 subtypes (at the bottom)! Because you have a primary and secondary version of each subtype. And then.. he goes on to say this could be expanded to 16 subtypes etc. :0
"This task is needed when the group increases to 7-8 people.
To distinguish eight subtypes, we add an additional scale - Primary / Secondary, which reflects the hierarchy of personal needs.
It should be noted that theoretically there must be seven such distinctions (including the three already known polarities). However, the description of the entire spectrum of subtype dichotomies is not the main purpose of this report.
Any type of behavior that satisfies shared group needs can be either primary or secondary. Primary needs are needs of a concrete, current nature (food, health, shelter, family, intimacy, and so forth). Secondary needs are deep, lofty (career, social status, spiritual world, obtaining knowledge, and so on). Questionnaires with the use of this scale have yet to be created."
@the bold part
1) why?!
2) yes.. then perhaps we will get way beyond 128 subtypes before counting in every other factor..
Although, I think some people said that IEI-Ni must be either C or H, and IEI-Fe either D or N.. Not sure if it's true but yeah.
So what do you have so far for your subtypes? Are you IEI-Fe, and if so, then D or N? And have you gotten into your primary or secondary hierarchy of needs?
I haven't even arrived at my own DCNH yet. Once I study and the book, I expect that will be easy.
I am curious what your Mom's type is, that feels she needs to monitor/correct your balance of learning and socializing! (She must be a very caring Mom, which is the best. The flip side of that is having to work hard to appropriately step back).
"A man with a definite belief always appears bizarre, because he does not change with the world; he has climbed into a fixed star, and the earth whizzes below him like a zoetrope."
........ G. ........... K. ............... C ........ H ........ E ...... S ........ T ...... E ........ R ........ T ........ O ........ N ........
"Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the Church, is often labeled today as fundamentalism... Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along
by every wind of teaching, looks like the only
attitude acceptable to today's standards." - Pope Benedict the XVI, "The Dictatorship of Relativism"
.
.
.
it is funny reading other IEI writing sometimesi supposedly have one of those "balanced" tritypes (417), but then it should also be considered that in those, all 3 fixes have the same "objects relations" (there was another name but i forget) style.. so 417 is triple withdrawn/idealism/frustration.. so in that sense I think those tritypes are still unbalanced, just in a different way.
well........... it seems they are well balanced between very unbalanced and very balanced then
the way you write feels so IEI(atleast to me)
plus my lack of punctuation oops
ohh ok so my really good IEE friend is 714..he has this calmness about him I like, but he also struggles massively with anxiety too. He is so/sp.. I've also realised that my SEI friend who I used to like a lot in a romantic way is 369..I think this explains why I find him so confusing..haha.. but helpful to think that he can't help being 'very balanced' one min and 'very unbalanced' the next haha. Maybe I can stop giving him a hard time now I've realised this hahaha.
Have you looked at this article? https://typevolution.com/2016/11/21/...nneagram-dual/
Last edited by Bethanyclaire; 08-17-2020 at 06:10 AM.
Recently I did start to think if so/sp duality might be good for me..theoretically of course..I guess instinct preference does come down to the individual. I think I notice some patterns out there..but not loads. I think sp/so would be good for me really (dual or non dual) but don't know if I want it LOL. maybe if they were cute. I dunno I'm still wondering if the stacks we go for in non dual are noticibly different in what we go for in dual? hmmmDCNH confuses me but I still like it
a lot of ppl don't believe in it but I think it's bc when you get deeper and deeper into categorizations, a lot depends on just the person's ability to see it. simply, if you don't have that level of perceptiveness when it comes to people, you will not see it, and therefore won't believe in it
also yeah instinctual variants are quite significant when it comes to compatibility!
well as so/sp i get along best longterm with sx-seconds, i don't necessarily think flipped is best.
DCNH is new to me as from yesterday..I feel like I actually need to 'retype' everyone I know in my head now to take in consideration that they have a DCNH part of them too..this stuff is endless! ha
I don't think I understand the primary/secondary version bit yet.
I am just looking at this bit for now:
First dichotomy: Contacting / Distancing
The first "contact" pole indicates the predominance of the need for contact, and the second "distancing" pole represents the need to maintain distance. Into the "contact" category fall clearly expressed extroverts as well as extroverted introverts. "Distancing" will be clearly expressed introverts, but also introverted extroverts – those extroverts who avoid intensive contact. The scale of I/E-vertness is thus split into four internal gradations [introverted introverts, extroverted introverts, introverted extoverts, and extroverted extroverts].
Second dichotomy: Terminating / Initiating
I understand the term "terminating" as the ability to finish what was started and a tendency towards orderliness and regulation. The term "initiating" represents the opposite tendency - to initiate and to easily move on to something else, with ensuing disorder in one's matters and affairs. As you can see, this is a concretization of the usual dichotomy rationality/irrationality. It would be incorrect to think that pristine order reigns in the house of every rational type, that the rational has clearly planning everything out, and that all irrationals throw everything aside in a mess and become burdened by planning. In reality, between these two poles there exist two intermediate gradations.
Terminating gradation encompasses people who are clearly expressed rationals as well as orderly irrationals, while initiating type of behavior belongs to those who are clearly expressed irrationals as well as disorderly rationals.
Third dichotomy: Connecting / Ignoring
This dichotomy represents the level of sensitivity to changes in one's environment. Connectors are very sensitive to changes changes, whereas ignorers, as the name suggests, are capable of paying no attention to this. This polarity is another interpretation of the the classical dichotomy dynamic/static [dynamic types are sensitive to what's happening around them and therefore correcting to "connecting", while statics remain largely unchanged by outside dynamics].
Combining these scales, we obtain the following 4 subtypes:
* Contacting, Terminating, Connecting - Dominant subtype (D);
* Contacting, Initiating, Ignoring - Creative subtype (C);
* Distancing, Terminating, Ignoring - Normalizing subtype (N);
* Distancing, Initiating, Connecting - Harmonizing subtype (H).
I think I can start to see the 'types' in people I know. However, I need to be confident in their enneagram instinct stacking first I think. Or the two might be confused for each other.
That's so funny about the Ni/Fe subtype appearances...I have wide eyes with fuller figure and I am ni subtype and my IEI friend who I think is fe subtype is thin with more squinting eyes and dresses very elegantly. coool
I remeber reading a random comment on the internet somewhere that there aren't really six enneagram stackings..there are only four. It stuck with me for some reason. I wonder if this primary/secondary stuff is similar to instincts...except there are only four. Just thinking out loud, do need to read/think more.
i think it does seem to correlate with instincts..I am harmonising secondary subtype..(harmonising and secondary together sound a bit like so/sx descriptions?? i think?? but could relate to other stacks too but maybe more closely to some more than others) and wait what if contact/ distancing, terminating/ initiating, connecting/ignoring relates to your tritype...my tritype 946 sounds like it matches with contact/initiating/connecting based on the descriptions in the article. oh god how am I gonna concentrate on anything else today lol. i'm also really confusing myself and keep editing..
and maybe for duality to work (well?)..you need compatible DCNH subtypes..(creative with harmonising, normalising with dominant) including maybe having one person with primary and one person with secondary? which in my head means me being with sp/so dual..which for me is a stack which typically lacks a bit of chemistry/depth in my interaction/relationship with them..but then that does sound like some duality descritptions..and for there to a be a big spark with a dual..maybe you are both going to be secondary subtypes or both primary subtypes right? or something? which doesn't sound healthy..haha oh no
ORRRR maybe matching instincts is best/ 'perfect'..with compatible DCNH and both being secondary or both being primary..which in my head is 793/ 792/ 794 tritype (in those particular orders) for me..which seems so unlikely to find haha. Socionics is silly. (and btw I worked this out through staring at all of the ennegram 7 tritypes for ages and noticing some sort of pattern whilst thinking about enneagram duals I'd met and what their personality type combos could be :s)
Last edited by Bethanyclaire; 08-17-2020 at 02:10 PM.
I think I def go for ESTP 7s. In the article I posted above the IEI author has worked out 'enneagram dual' for each tritype..and mine is 7. (You can look at the other tritypes and see whose dual you are too). I have worked out that lots of my friends are my enneagram dual or I am theirs. And she also says in the article that for long term relationships you should share at least one number in your tritype. So a 712 for example would be no good for me! And I wonder if that'd mean they weren't the right DCNH type/ instinct type/ socionics subtype..same for estp 8s- I think they might be likely to be wrong subtypes for me. I dunno where I'm getting that from, just a hunch or maybe generalisation (but can think of a 738 guy who is very cool but wouldn't work for sure). Saying that I think I get on well actually with most people with a 7 in their tritype- I have a really good 271 EIE so/sp friend.
calming presence...umm maybe when I was going through a more confident phase in life I noticed people feeling good around me.. probably sometimes but honestly I think it's something people appreciate on a subconscious level and don't tell me (of course I wish they would haha) Haha my sis is SEE. We get on great but I think she is pretty alarmed when I talk about stuff like socionics.
(the ennegram diagram looks very complex..I do like the idea of having simple digrams/ concepts to show how all the parts of personality relate to each other..)
@chocolatte
'instinct stackings? how could that be though. i don't rly think primary/secondary (or DCNH) overlaps with instincts but that is my personal opinion.
like say,
I'm an SO dom so here would be my interpretation of what a primary/secondary SO is. also don't quote me on this lmao. i'm like you, thinking aloud
primary: concerned with rising in community for concrete matters, an influential position that gives power (although it may be more subtle), so they have a lot of say in things idk
secondary: concerned with leaving a lasting imprint for a while, wants to be abstractly respected and have some sort of effect on community by the ppl'
I like this description..gonna mull it over. I think maybe there are some links but only sometimes. Like I think sp/so could often be primary subtype/normalising subytpe. Or if we picture the subtypes as exisiting on a spectrum then a sp/so would have a big chunk of primary/normalising in them, though they might be say creative subtype. I dunno though, as I'm saying that I'm not sure what I mean at all. OR for example a sp/so creative would likely be a primary rather than secondary coz they care about sp stuff..(it says in the DCNH primary is about home, family etc right?) so they are like a sp/so with some added 'sx' (I'm basically designing my ideal ESTP lol). I'm pretty sure I've seen DCNH 'creative' as being a beta thing somewhere too.. or an inherited beta 'streak' or 'pattern'..sorry if my logi c is out the window.
Regarding DCNH/instincts:
I am starting to think yes, that DCNH compatibility is very important. For the instincts I have just absorbed a whole load of info..have read quite a bit on it. I am now just using this table which helps a little to spot people's stacks. http://www.enneagramdimensions.net/a...f_subtypes.pdf (at the bottom of the page).
Btw I think my so/sp friend is in a relationship with sp/sx guy. And he is good friends with my sx/so sis. I think I'm starting to accept that sx/so for me is better as friends. I've noticed there is a lot of chemistry with people who have a tritype that almost mirrors mine. So mine 946 with 639 or 739..(the 3/4 are in the same position and the 9s are opposite each other- not getting more technical than that for now haha). I know for sure that I've met 739/749 sx/so estps with a lot of chemistry there..and they probably were creative for DCNH. I could picture it being too intense though- didn't know them for long.
Thanks for the chat! The DCNH stuff was throwing me and I was about to give up looking for a dual. Not yet lol. Btw I was thinking about my ESTP female friend. Not sure of her subtypes (don't think perfect match) but the chemistry is there. She is my only long term ESTP person I've known. And it is exactly how they say. We had ups and downs and now she lives in another country. But the bond is special and strong and whatever subtype she is, it doesn't matter, I don't have to think about our relationship too much, it just works. Based on that I think the subtypes don't need to be some perfect combination, at least maybe not haha.
Also I've been thinking that I'm giving sp/so a bit of a hard time in general. I think as friends they can hold back a bit, bit actually in relationships the bond gets much deeper. Also, sp/so 7s seem to have similar interests to me- like I went on date the other day with a SEE sp/so who likes raving like me (I had thought he might be ESTP from talking on the app).
Maybe for certain types it's better to be with matching subtype (sx/so I'm thinking..) and others it's better to be with different. I like so/sp a lot for friends btw
Last edited by Bethanyclaire; 08-19-2020 at 05:47 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
