What is your view on subtypes?

[Rebelondeck]

I don’t think socionics proposes a linear relationship between type and behavior. I mean, type is a categorical variable for starters…

A categorical variable has no meaning unless there's a defined interaction among all the variables from a system perspective. Output (for example, Fe) by itself as a category has no meaning so a Se-subtype has none either. IEs shouldn't be treated as distinct objects that are simply mixed together; a mixture of these ingredients produces this personality sounds like linear thinking to me.

a.k.a. I/O

[Poptart]

A categorical variable has no meaning unless there's a defined interaction among all the variables from a system perspective. Output (for example, Fe) by itself as a category has no meaning so a Se-subtype has none either. IEs shouldn't be treated as distinct objects that are simply mixed together; a mixture of these ingredients produces this personality sounds like linear thinking to me.

a.k.a. I/O

It sounds like linear thinking or a linear model?

The closest thing to a linear model in socionics would be the relationship between strength of information processing and dimensionality (and btw I problems with this aspect of socionics because I think it’s a massive oversimplification of the idea which often gets misapplied).

[Rebelondeck]

It sounds like linear thinking or a linear model?

The closest thing to a linear model in socionics would be the relationship between strength of information processing and dimensionality (and btw I problems with this aspect of socionics because I think it’s a massive oversimplification of the idea which often gets misapplied).

I don't know why I threw in the word "thinking"; it must have been a slip on my part. Socionics models including sub-typing seem to be nothing more than redefinitions of the classifications, which is a bottom-up perspective - certainly not a top-down design.

a.k.a. I/O