Using more Fi and Ti would make you Normalizing subtype - since those are the IJ elements, and also fits with what you said in the orderliness thread as N is the most orderly subtype.Originally Posted by User Name
Using more Fi and Ti would make you Normalizing subtype - since those are the IJ elements, and also fits with what you said in the orderliness thread as N is the most orderly subtype.
I don't agree with that, though I acknowledge that opinions are just that. Increased usage of one Ji leads to less usage of the other. Hence why a base subtype has weaker role than a creative subtype.
But also, the two Ji(or Pi, Pe, Je) attitudes have contradictory philosophies(ex. Fe is about inferring and discerning, whereas Te sticks to the facts. Both devalue the others importance). Using both enough that your comparitively stronger than your same type peers would, Imo, lessen the Normalizing attitude altogether, as they muddy each other's waters.
As an H-IEI, I have exceptionally weak Si, and better than Average Fi and Ti. Because those two conflict often in choices of action, I default to another spectrum altogether and rely even heavier on my Ni.
Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.
I'm just reporting what the article itself said. I think it's more like a layer on top of type rather than working within Model A - as clearly you're right about one Ji lessening the other according to model A and standard socionics theory, and this contradicts that.
Edit: Put it this way, I think it's more behavioral than cognitive. Socionics theory is cognitive and the 2-subtype theory is as well, but DCNH seems to focus more social interactions (who plays what role in a group) and on behavioral traits than anything else.Strengthening the linear-assertive functions
, whatever position this pair occupies within the framework of the sociomodel, forms a dominant subtype (D).
Strengthening of the mobile-flexible functions
leads to the appearance of a creative subtype (C).
Strengthening of the balanced-stable functions
gives a normalizing subtype (N).
Strengthening the receptive-adaptive functions
engenders a harmonizing subtype (H).
These functions are strengthened precisely in pairs, since they possess close energization (another way of saying they complement each other).
Last edited by squark; 09-05-2017 at 04:22 AM.
I've observed the DCNH subtypes for many years. I'd say its primarily about "energized" functions. Behavior is secondary. It follows from it. And yes, it is a layer on top of model A. Some kind of emergent phenomenon. So DCNH is not a classification based on behaviour. It's a "psychic"/consciousness phenomenon, and actually quite easy to see.
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)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote