DCNH Forum Member Typings

[Gilly]

I tend to think Piper/Pinnochio is C-LSI-Ti. Probably 6w7/8w7/not sure on heart fix or instinct, although I think sx first is likely.

[The Exception]

Niffweed (aestrivex) has compiled a DCNH list of selected members (some of whom no longer post here or are active on different forums). How accurate do you think these are?

http://socionics.ws/wiki/index.php?t.../userlist/DCNH


Niffweed has me as an H-LII on that list and after PMing Krig, he thought H too. For awhile I thought I was H subtype but I'm no longer sure because some of the C and N stuff fits too. So basically, there all up for grabs, except for D, which I think I can safely rule out.

I do identify with strengthened Ne but not strengthened Se. I often score high on ILE on socionics tests and the last test I took, typed me as ILE. High ILE scores might suggest C subtype. However, compared to the others pegged as C’s such as Maritsa, Tcaudilllg, Pied Piper, JimBean, I don’t think my ideas and way of thinking are as nearly as “out there” as those people.

I also score high on EII and ILI. EII might be consistent with Fi-normalizing and ILI with Ni-harmonizing.

Then there’s the dichotomies: contact/distance, initiating/terminating, and connecting/ignoring which I have trouble placing myself. The first time I read through this I thought I most closely fit normalizing but that could just be because as an LII, I’m in the IJ temperament. The real question is, how do I compare to other LIIs? I don’t see myself as more IJ like relative to other LIIs so initially I ruled out normalizing but now I think its possible.

Overall, I identify more with distance than contact but I’m not sure how I compare to other LIIs on this. I identify with both initiating and terminating. I start a lot of projects and things but I also feel a need to finish what I start. I’m not overly regulating but I have a strong need to eliminate disorder and loose ends. And with the last dichotomy, connecting/ignoring, I find myself going from one extreme to another on this. I’m either so wrapped up in what I’m doing that I don’t see the changes taking place around me, or I’m hypersensitive to every little change. I think I may be somewhat more connecting compared to other LIIs. So help me out here.

And based on the old DCNH descriptions posted by Kristiina,
http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/alternative-socionics-theories/31690-old-dcnh-descriptions.html

I see myself as using a combination of C, N, and H strategies. It’s hard to tell which one predominates. Regarding the C description, I identify with choosing the least offensive behavior when in a group where I can’t act like my type. I am capable of adapting my behavior in different situations but I don’t know if I’m quite as chameleon like as the EP description. I can only stretch my behavior to a limited extent.

Although capable of adapting, I actually prefer not to have to adapt my behavior, which is consistent with N. I will get very quiet in cases where I know my typical type behavior will not be accepted and adapting appropriately would be too much of a stretch for me to be comfortable. Actually, I would prefer to flee such situations where I can. (what subtype would that be? Harmonizing?)

And regarding the H description, I don’t think I’m particularly forceful in showing type like behavior. Like the creative subtype, I am capable of adapting my behavior depending on the situation. I rarely offend anybody and am careful not to say or do something others may find offensive. Overall, I guess I’m inclined to identify most with this H description but it is a close call.

Awhile back I posted a poll on my DCNH subtype. Very few people voted and I’d be interested in getting more input. http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/whats-my-type-model/26931-warrior-librarians-subtype.html

And how do the two subtype and DCNH systems correlate? If you are a rational subtype in the two subtype system, shouldn’t you be D or N in DCNH? And if you’re irrational subtype, shouldn’t you be C or H? That makes the most sense, yet I see examples where this is not the case. Polikujm reporting himself as C-ILE-Ti and people typing Pied Piper as C-LSI-Ti

[Gilly]

Your font color is impossible for me to read.

[Krig the Viking]

For those that are interested, I just finished a proper translation of those descriptions hkkmr posted from Gulenko's blog, here: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...tml#post681690

[Not A Communist Shill]

Some posts moved to: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...r-typings.html

[Gilly]

Might want to snag my last one.

[Exodus]

I'm basically sure I'm a C. (I definitely relate to the "extreme individualism" part.) Maybe possibly H. What do others think?

[Aleksei]

LII-Ne fits, yeah.

Dual strengthening DCNH is crap. if you identify a main focus in a function outside your ego block, then odds are you are not the type you identified yourself as. I only started finding DCNH and IE subtypes outside the ego block once I realized this.

[Exodus]

LII-Ne fits, yeah.

Dual strengthening DCNH is crap. if you identify a main focus in a function outside your ego block, then odds are you are not the type you identified yourself as. I only started finding DCNH and IE subtypes outside the ego block once I realized this.

So why is your type SLE-Ni...

[Aleksei]

So why is your type SLE-Ni...

DCNH IEs aren't IEs per se, but rather subdivisions of the DCNH types. For example, Te IE subtype refers to dominant behavior rather than a concern for business efficiency. Ni subtype for its part refers to shut-off, self-submerged behavior, which fits me -- I'm more withdrawn than SLEs normally are.

[pianosinger]

I think I'm a D. It was Slacker, I think, who first suggested it a while back, and I've been considering it ever since and it seems more right than anything else.

A few tip-offs:

I'm not naturally inclined to be a leader in most things. But, when I do assume a leadership position in something important to me, I have little problem taking and asserting control-- at least until things seem to be going smoothly enough without my direct guidance. But if I'm at all worried about where something is headed, or what people might do with my ideas or methods when I'm not around, I really struggle to hold myself back and not micromanage every step of the process.

I admit, I can be pretty anal about some things. When it comes to my kitchen, especially, I have a hard time letting anyone else-- including my husband-- take responsibility for what goes on in there. The dishes have to be washed a certain way. Food has to be stored a certain way... My kitchen counter is often covered in dirty dishes waiting to be washed, because I perfer that over having a full sink (no dishwasher, and only one sink for washing; the other sink has the dish drainer over it). And heaven help the person who sets a glass in my sink; I've had far too many glasses get broken that way.

Jsut about the only housekeeping chores I really feel comfortable letting my husband do are the vacuuming, tidying up, and maybe the bathroom. And it's not that he's incompetent to do other things (he lived as a capable bachelor for several years before he married me). The issue lies with me, not with him. It just so happens that I've taken the housekeeping upon myself-- it's my job. And when I own a job, I own it. Even when I slack in my duties, I'd rather they not get done at all, than have someone else come in and do my job for me.

When I'm stressed out, I get really overly emotional. Just about the only time I am emotional is when I'm stressed. I watch videos of myself as a young child, and I notice it even then. When things aren't going my way, or at least in a way that I am comfortable with, I'm going to make everyone else aware of it. And I know that makes me sound like a spoiled brat or something, but really the majority of the time I am calm and rational and selfless enough. And in public, I work a lot harder at keeping my emotions in check. I even kept my emotions hidden from my parents growing up; I feel much more comfortable letting loose around my husband, though.

I enjoy performing.

[Absurd]

What's your E-type ?

[Nowisthetime]

I think it's very important to also check it relatively. Comparing yourself with other IEEs. Isn't Rick N-IEE? He has posted videos of himself.

[pianosinger]

[Megadoomer]

Well, I hate to say it, but... I guess you can't be the subtype you're claiming to be right now. You wrote that: "Sociotype: D-Ne-IEE" below your avatar and I think "Ne" means you're the Ne subtype in the 2-subtype system, right? If so, it doesn't work since "D" is a rational subtype (strengthening either Fe or Te) and Ne is irrational. All subtype systems are connected and you can't be an irrational sub in one instance and a rational one in another.

[Pianosinger]

Well, the "Ne" is from the 2-subtype system. I guess I haven't read anywhere talking about rational subtypes vs. rational ones...I just thought the 2-subtype system meant you were either Base function subtype or Creative function subtype...

Where is it stated that subtypes are all based on rationality vs. irrationality? Couldn't they just as easily be based on some other dichotomy? Like Bold vs. Cautious?

Not trying to be difficult; but I would appreciate some sources if it's not too much trouble.

[Megadoomer]

This is the hierarchy of the subtype systems. I've seen it posted in another thread and I've already reposted it several times here and there because it's quite useful. It can be applied to every type in this form: (order: Base type - 2 subs - 4 subs DCNH - 8 subs IE - 16 subs dual type) I don't claim that 8+ subtypes are reasonable, this is just how they are organized.

.................................................. ENFp -ENTj
...................................Te-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp -ESTj
................... D-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp -ENFj
...................................Fe-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ESFj
........ Fi-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-INTj
...................................Ti-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ISTj
................... N-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-INFj
...................................Fi-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ISFj
ENFp -
.................................................. ENFp-ENTp
...................................Ne-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ENFp
................... C-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ESTp
...................................Se-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ESFp
........ Ne-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-INTp
...................................Ni-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-INFp
................... H-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ISTp
...................................Si-ENFp
.................................................. ENFp-ISFp

As you can see, there is a rational/irrational divide within the accepting/producing subtype system. Basically, you have to choose one possibility in each step from left to right. For example: ENFp -> Ne-ENFp -> H-ENFp -> Ni-ENFp -> ENFp-INTp ect.

[Pianosinger]

Okay. But my question is still not satisfiably answered: WHY is it all divided along the rationality/irrationality line? Rather than, say, extroversion/introversion, or accepting/producing, or something else? Who decided to order the subtypes this way? And why?

Anyway, if what you say is true, then maybe I'm more certain of being a D than I am of being Ne-subtype...

[pianosinger]

What's your E-type ?

For a while I was going with 6w7, but I'm really not very positive.

[Cat King Cole]

So, I've just revised my Socionics type and my etype. The next step is picking a DCNH subtype for me!

Current candidates are Creative and Normalising, possibly Harmonising.

Behaviour in groups

If there is no leader and I'm in a completely disorganised mob, I'll take charge for only as long as it takes to get the group moving. I'd say I'm more comfortable as a "catalyst" or "mastermind" than an actual leader. It depends though. In a small group where a leadership role is expected of me, I lead. In contrast, I'm really uncomfortable being a follower--unless doing so keeps responsibility I don't feel I can handle off my shoulders (social loafing ftw).

Typically I prefer to work on my own, because that way I'm neither taking direction from anyone else (and having my freedom to set my own pace taken away), nor being forced to direct other people. If I must do the latter, I do, and quite comfortably--I just don't want to be seen as bossy. I like people who I can direct without worrying about losing favour.

In an intellectual group, I openly talk about my ideas and thoughts, usually to clear up misunderstandings (or people's sloppy thinking, in general). I quite openly criticise people who aren't thinking clearly or properly. This tendency of mine is even quite visible on these very forums. The rest of the time I'm usually very quiet and prefer either to watch or daydream.

[NewBorn STAR]

So, I've just revised my Socionics type and my etype. The next step is picking a DCNH subtype for me!

Current candidates are Creative and Normalising, possibly Harmonising.

Behaviour in groups

If there is no leader and I'm in a completely disorganised mob, I'll take charge for only as long as it takes to get the group moving. I'd say I'm more comfortable as a "catalyst" or "mastermind" than an actual leader. It depends though. In a small group where a leadership role is expected of me, I lead. In contrast, I'm really uncomfortable being a follower--unless doing so keeps responsibility I don't feel I can handle off my shoulders (social loafing ftw).

Typically I prefer to work on my own, because that way I'm neither taking direction from anyone else (and having my freedom to set my own pace taken away), nor being forced to direct other people. If I must do the latter, I do, and quite comfortably--I just don't want to be seen as bossy. I like people who I can direct without worrying about losing favour.

In an intellectual group, I openly talk about my ideas and thoughts, usually to clear up misunderstandings (or people's sloppy thinking, in general). I quite openly criticise people who aren't thinking clearly or properly. This tendency of mine is even quite visible on these very forums. The rest of the time I'm usually very quiet and prefer either to watch or daydream.

Cant you answer your own question ?

[Cat King Cole]

If I could I won't have posted.

Can't you ask sensible questions?

[NewBorn STAR]

If I could I won't have posted.

Can't you ask sensible questions?

Well it just seems kinda obvious to me that which is impression your description gives. Only thing that stands out as more DcNh trait is how you emphasize individuality which is mainly linked to the creative subtype. And it seems to be good fit for you overall too.

Sensible demands always a subject. It might not be the askes fault if one is not able to comprehend the question

[Cat King Cole]

Obvious impressions are the least thoroughly thought-out impressions though, ime. I could see myself being H or N subtypes, especially considering that I'm not a very socially extraverted extratim.

[willekeurig]

I've been interested in learning more about DCNH, but I still have trouble understanding how it's supposed to work and therefore have difficulties in determining my own subtype. I'm sure I'm an extroverted subtype - either Dominant or Creative. I can relate to the contact dichotomy, but about terminating/initiating and connecting/ignoring I'm not sure at all. I'd say ignoring describes me better, but then again as a Se polr you'd think not being in tune with the environment is self-evident? I find it hard to say how I compare to other EIIs. If that helps anything, I'm quite confident I'd be a Ne subtype in the 2subtype theory, at least if the wikisocion describtions are to be trusted.

There are also some things about the describtions whose logic I can't really follow. For example, in the Dominant type describtion it says that it's "the most similar of all to his type's description" and "In his 1st function the Dominant works "at full steam" and even more. In that sense, it's not just hidden somewhere processing information -- in Dominant it is evident at all times." Now, if DCNH is a sub temperament theor" where dominant represents EJ temperament, why would these statements be true to any other than EJ types? Why would a D-subtype of a Fe/Te polr socionics type be the closest of all to their type's describtion?


Things about Dominant subtype that I can relate to:
- "the ethical is the most excitable"
- I take the leadership explicitly (especially if someone else doesn't take it or I'm frustrated about a situation)
- I sometimes feel a sense of "competition" in group situations if there are other people with strong personalities, even if we get along well and like each other
- "the Dominant, firstly, pulls attention to himself.." This. Though maybe this is just me being a declaring type or something?
- "..and secondly, "gives orders". Furthermore, he is blunt, if he uses some sort of manipulation, it is rather crude." This happens to me. For example with
1. groupworks at school (I usually don't trust anyone to be intelligent/talented/creative/insightful enough by my standards and will want to do things my way)
2. SEIs and their Te polr. It really annoys the fuck out of me, and I often start commanding them/doing their jobs myself out of pure frustration when they can't complete even the simplest Te-related tasks. I don't like this tendency tho, and I try to restrict this kind of behaviour since I know how bad it feels when you sense that someone does things for you only because they think you're a helpless retard. I don't know if a true D would see it as a problem..?

Things abut Creative subtype I can relate to:
- "This subtype, conversely, is the least similar to the canonical type description." I can't really relate to the stereotype (?) of a timid/exemplary/prudish introvert
- "with Creative subtype the intertype relationships are also "watered down" -- because he conducts himself "outside the box" by the standards of his type." I'm not really sure what this means, I think I can relate, but then again I'm E4 so I'm "supposed to" see myself as different and unique or whatever.. Hard to say how the intertype relationship model works compared to other people, so..
- "He does not really understand the various social-relational games, but he does not protest if he gets entagled in such a game" again I think I relate but I'm not exactly sure if this means what I think it means
- "Easily stirred, an "odd duck", can act in ways unusual in general and alien to his type in particular" Thiiiss.
- "The Creative is not interested in anything besides that which is truly interesting to him -- in the sense that he ignores everything else (passively or actively). Including people" yep yep, this is me
- "The attitude to standards in general is negative or indifferent" I don't really give a fuck about standards/rules if I don't see the reason/meaning behind them

TL;DR: I'd be glad to get some clarifications about the difference between D & C subtypes, opinions/ideas about my subtype if anyone has any, questions or examples that'd help me determine my type, etc. Thanks!

[FDG]

Just take a look at your career interests. Dominant-Harmonizing subtypes are often very attracted to large corporate structures, or more "traditional" careers anyway (of course, barring type-enneagram perferences), Creative and Harmonizing types prefer either more "creative" venues or more "relaxed" places. Also, oftentimes Creative subtypes are pretty blunt and not so easy to get along with, whereas dominant subtypes have a tendency to be "apparently" more diplomatic, their dominance is more "political".

[willekeurig]

Just take a look at your career interests. Dominant-Harmonizing subtypes are often very attracted to large corporate structures, or more "traditional" careers anyway (of course, barring type-enneagram perferences), Creative and Harmonizing types prefer either more "creative" venues or more "relaxed" places.

Even the idea of having a career feels distant now, but I think it'd definitely be the latter. I'd die in a traditional, boring 8 to 16 job. But I dunno, like you said this could well be an enneagram thing.. I've understood 4s of all types have most difficulties with jobs and routines and fitting into society.

Also, oftentimes Creative subtypes are pretty blunt and not so easy to get along with, whereas dominant subtypes have a tendency to be "apparently" more diplomatic, their dominance is more "political".

This is really interesting! I've been leaning towards Creative, but for some reason the fact that I'm often blunt and quite a difficult person to deal with corresponded with my idea of the Dominant subtype much better.. If you can tell something more about this I'm all ears.

[willekeurig]

Anyone else?

[Ver]

So do you have problems establishing whether you are initiating/terminating, connecting/ignoring? Maybe you could think of people you know and your interaction with them? It would be good to hve some examples of people of different DCNH subtypes.

[willekeurig]

So do you have problems establishing whether you are initiating/terminating, connecting/ignoring? Maybe you could think of people you know and your interaction with them? It would be good to hve some examples of people of different DCNH subtypes.

I have problem establishing whether I'm D or C, and I figured learning whether I'm initiating or terminating and connecting or ignoring would help with that. But I have no idea about either pair really. Also I don't know the system well enough to type people I know.. I can sometimes say what subtype someone is definitely not, but that's about it.

[Absurd]

Hmm, I was somewhat curious about it, too. I mean how on Earth people do that with subtypes, pulling them out of thin air and assigning to other people. Going to roam in this thread.

[mikesilb]

It makes sense on the surface to associate C with this sort of sporadic activity because of EP temperament, but I don't think this is a correct conceptualization of this subtype. The way Gulenko describes C, it isn't like that at all.

Ds are much more concerned with engaging their environment, activating others around them, and generally being extroverted in the classical sense. That's because of connecting. Cs are ignorers.

C are mostly concerned with, and think only about, the components of their theoretical systems. They quite literally don't care about the environment around them and very quickly lose interest in it in favor of what's going on in their heads. Gulenko talks about Archimedes (ILE) as the classic example. The Romans found him drawing diagrams in the sand, and when they came to arrest him (and probably execute him), he asked them if he could have a few more minutes to finish his diagrams.

They're extroverted in the sense of needing to share their ideas with other people. They might impulsively decide to strike up a conversation. But because of ignoring and initiating, they quickly lose interest even in that and go do something else more mentally stimulating.

Extroversion is more evident in things like a high rate of energy expenditure and desire for mental stimulation than it is in being a socialite.

So don't let the extrovert description fool you, they're not social butterflies like D. It's hard for any ignorer to be.

If I am actually a C-ESE (or more specifically an ile-ESE) in the manner that Krig privately suggested for me, this description could be a really good reason why. I can totally immerse myself in the types of theoretical, abstract material (in which Socionics fits hook, line, and sinker into the types of 'mental masturbation' that I love to do). I could totally see myself doing the Archimedes thing in drawing a speculative model as to how I think the data might fit together. As a biochemical scientist by training, I can totally immerse myself in these intellectual concepts and simply lose myself within them. However, despite this, I am still an ESE since I run more intimately on interpersonal, friendly/cooperative, passionate enthusiasm. Perhaps, novelties are just the type of thing that sets my enthusiasm on fire. My favorite rock band is RUSH (if you didn't know this already ) and I think that their unique musical style (very ILE-ish in general) is precisely the type of thing that sets off a lot of my -ish raw energy while listening to them. Not all bands activate me that way, and I think that the band's strong leanings including Geddy Lee's vocals (having a dose of alpha in it) provides the perfect arena for my ESE nature to come out with all its enthusiasm. In everything that I wrote above, I am juxtaposing curiosity, discovery, novelty, and passion together which is seemingly aligned with the C-ESE style.

I have previously wondered as to whether I am a H-ESE (since that would make me a socially introverted extratim and a slightly more laid-back/adaptable/approachable version of an EJ) or a C-ESE (for all the reasons above). But it is posts like the one above that indicates to me that a C has certain social introvertness inherent in it (due to its interest in theoretical matters that at least the Cs who are more Ne-like than Se-like). So perhaps C-ESE could be right. Like an H-ESE, I care about harmony, peacefulness, not hurting others or making waves. However, maybe what I wrote in the last paragraph is even more telling as to which one my DCNH is (and that C is correct).

If anyone has any thoughts or feedback based on anything that I wrote about here, definitely let me know!

[Beautiful sky]

I don't know which one I am, and I don't have a good perception of myself so Mike will have to answer this question when he gets back @Jadae

[Nowisthetime]

So perhaps C-ESE could be right.

Oh, so you're C-ESE now. For examples of C-ESE I would suggest TheOnlyLuca (she is interesting, really) and Lars Ulrick from Metallica.

[ashlesha]

SOMEBODY DCNH TYPE ME PLEASE?!?!?!?

[mikesilb]

Oh, so you're C-ESE now. For examples of C-ESE I would suggest TheOnlyLuca (she is interesting, really) and Lars Ulrick from Metallica.

I can potentially see either of them as C-ESEs. While I'm not definite on either, I would say that this type-subtype combo is certainly in the right ballpark.

Other C-ESEs...Robin Williams, Mel Brooks, Dwight Howard, and Earvin Magic Johnson to name a few. A truly friendly and fun-loving type!

[mikesilb]

It is funny (ok...not funny ha ha ) because most of these C-ESEs who I can think of are Enneagram 7s (namely 7w6s). In my case, I am a 6w7, and in this sense I might be a bit more analytical/academically-inclined, people pleasing/warm/ingratiating, and somewhat insecure and lacking some confidence than the people who I just mentioned. Yet, I am equally fun loving and emotionally passionate in a similar manner that people of this type-subtype combo might tend to be.

[mikesilb]

One more comment: I find Magic to be a really great example of this particular type-subtype. He had the internal drivenness and work ethic (in true EJ manner) to compete for and win 5 NBA Championships, while he also had the finesse and light-heartedness that made him such a likeable character both on and off the court (looking just like a C-ESE would).

[FDG]

SOMEBODY DCNH TYPE ME PLEASE?!?!?!?

Creative subtype for sure.

[InvisibleJim]

N

[ashlesha]

N

4 who?

[Galen]

[ashlesha]

galen i give you N.

[InvisibleJim]

4 who?

4 me