Personality Cafe banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
You know how in Socionics there is subtypes such as IEE-1Ne?

I assume the subtypes work like this:

Say there are three ILE's. I would assume the ILE-0 would be pretty typical of an ILE, while a ILE-1Ne would be more inclined to seek out possibilities, or whatever Ne does.

A ILE-1Ti would probably be more inclined to make sure things make sense, or whatever Ti does than a ILE-0.

I'm not sure how high the number can go for subtypes in Socionics, but I think that number would be 3.

And I also think they can be represented by their 4-letter types, such as ENFp-1Ne (example), ENTp-0, and ISTp-1Se.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
The numbered subtype system is specific to user @RSV3, a member from other Socionics boards. The idea is that some people are a stronger degree of a given subtype than others. IIRC, it also played into his theory of romantic behaviors, particularly the idea that someone can be a combination of two depending on subtype. For example, an IEE-Ne would be more of an Infantile style, whereas an IEE-Fi would be more of an Infantile/Aggressor combo.

As for the four-letter nomenclature, that's actually something that was introduced by Sergei Ganin of Socionics.com, who imported the MBTI-esque format in order to make Westerners feel more comfortable with the theory (since many were familiar with MBTI). Which, IMO, is much of why we have this clusterfuck of supposed type-conversion confusion now. But I digress.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Are socionics IM elements different than MBTI functions?

Because I'm more used to functions.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,444 Posts
Are socionics IM elements different than MBTI functions?

Because I'm more used to functions.
It's the same basic concept, but they're defined differently. Much more consistently and concisely, at that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: counterintuitive

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
It's the same basic concept, but they're defined differently. Much more consistently and concisely, at that.
Okay then.

How would I find out the IM elements?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
Here is an article on the differences between cognitive functions and IM elements. This page gives some keywords of the IM elements along with where they fit within the theory (static/dynamic, introverted/extroverted, rational/irrational). It also has links to more descriptions within the site.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Here is an article on the differences between cognitive functions and IM elements. This page gives some keywords of the IM elements along with where they fit within the theory (static/dynamic, introverted/extroverted, rational/irrational). It also has links to more descriptions within the site.
I would think I'm an IEE-0, unsure about subtype.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
As a sidenote, I really like the alternative names given for the IM elements in that second link. They do a fairly good job of indicating what each IM element is about. Except for Te, maybe. XD

Emotive Ethics (Fe)
Relational Ethics (Fi)

Volitional Sensing (Se)
Experiential Sensing (Si)

Algorithmic Logic (Te)
Structural Logic (Ti)

Potentiality Intuition (Ne)
Temporal Intuition (Ni)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,384 Posts
I would think I'm an IEE-0, unsure about subtype.
My understanding is that subtypes aren't a unanimously accepted part of the theory. I personally don't have a problem with the concept, as long as it doesn't get too crazy. I'm not trying to say to not explore your subtype; this is just more of an FYI.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,227 Posts
I'm not crazy about the subtypes now, but I used to be. Socionics type descriptions in general are much more specific than MBTI, but not specific enough to account for archetypal variations within each type, hence subtypes.

There are a few conceptual issues and a few pragmatic:


  1. There could be endless subtypes down to the individual level - a.k.a. 7.1 billion subtypes
  2. The value of knowing your subtype is unclear unless you use it in interrelationships, but that also hasn't yet been tested as well as interrelationships in general
  3. The divide between, for example, a Creative subtype and that type's Mirror partner needs to be further explored (IEI-Fe and EIE-Ni) - i.e. what is innately Lead and what is innately Creative as they stand apart from the IEs involved
  4. Validation for subtypes could encroach onto other theories, or what makes each subtype different could be explained by other theories such as Big 5 or the enneagram

I sometimes use subtype. They are helpful when you aren't sure of the Leading function, as the person's archetype will be slightly different from what you read online. They also explain some relational dynamics, such as why I do better than expected with EIE-Ni and LSE-Te (Supervisory) and not as well as expected with SEE-Se. Or why I can look like some SLI-Te until you watch an interaction closely. It is also interesting to compare yourself with Identity types to see why certain emphases, modes vary between types that prefer the same stack.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
The best subtype system is DCNH, it is actually more than just subtypes, it is borderline a separate model. Someone called it an "emergent phenomenon". It is closely related to model A, but sort of semi-independent.

You can read about it here, here and here.

They are all great articles and should be studied carefully.

It is based on the observation that people seem to have an "energization" of functions in pairs. Fe/Te energization is Dominant subtype, Ne/Se energization is Creative, Ti/Fi is Normalizing, Si/Ni is harmonizing. This is all regardless of where these elements happen to be in the particular type. All types show themselves through all of these subtypes.

Even though the functions energize in pairs, people also frequently show more of the other. That way you can separate for example Ti-normalizing from Fi-normalizing etc. That way you can easily expand from 4 to 8 subtypes in some cases. But this separation is not as clear as N from C etc.

You can also use dichotomies to refer to these subtypes. Then it is of course: D= EJ, C=EP, N=IJ, and H=IP subtype.

It's important to notice that this "energization" is NOT the same as emphasizing the use of the particular function in model A. A SLI who uses lots of his creative function is not a Dominant SLI. The direct connection to the model A structure seems to be this: Dominant uses base a lot, Creative creative, Normalizing uses role, and Harmonizing uses PoLR.

The almost mystical thing is that the compatibility follows the same pattern as in standard socionics. D goes with N, and H with C. And this is something very important and common in the relationships you see in real life. If you for example want to play the match-maker and bring duals together you should also consider DCNH to refine the match.

I use DCNH all the time. It's very helpful, and also makes your typings better (if used corrctly).

Some examples:

D-ILE: Richard Dawkins
C-ILE: John Lennon, Russel Brand
N-ILE: Chris Hedges
H-ILE: Matthew Barney

D-SEI: Kirk Hammett (Metallica)
C-SEI: Björk Gudmundsdottir
N-SEI: I don't have any videos, but I am one myself :)
H-SEI: Lisa Mitchell, Yoko Ono

D-LII: sorry, no vids
C-LII: Lawrence Krauss
N-LII Noam Chomsky
H-LII: Paul Auster
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
372 Posts
There is no subtypes theory in classical Socionics. I do not recommend you to use it. Classical Socionics = Jung + model A + intertype relations.
Subtype systems like DCNH don't change classical socionics. Model A is still the same. But they give some additional insights into the problem of systematic similarities and differences inside a type. For DCNH for example the phenomenon is obviously out there, it's also very relevant for compatibility, so I would recommend learning it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
I'm not crazy about the subtypes now, but I used to be. Socionics type descriptions in general are much more specific than MBTI, but not specific enough to account for archetypal variations within each type, hence subtypes.

There are a few conceptual issues and a few pragmatic:


  1. There could be endless subtypes down to the individual level - a.k.a. 7.1 billion subtypes
  2. The value of knowing your subtype is unclear unless you use it in interrelationships, but that also hasn't yet been tested as well as interrelationships in general
  3. The divide between, for example, a Creative subtype and that type's Mirror partner needs to be further explored (IEI-Fe and EIE-Ni) - i.e. what is innately Lead and what is innately Creative as they stand apart from the IEs involved
  4. Validation for subtypes could encroach onto other theories, or what makes each subtype different could be explained by other theories such as Big 5 or the enneagram

I sometimes use subtype. They are helpful when you aren't sure of the Leading function, as the person's archetype will be slightly different from what you read online. They also explain some relational dynamics, such as why I do better than expected with EIE-Ni and LSE-Te (Supervisory) and not as well as expected with SEE-Se. Or why I can look like some SLI-Te until you watch an interaction closely. It is also interesting to compare yourself with Identity types to see why certain emphases, modes vary between types that prefer the same stack.
Hey there, Figure. I saw this post and even though I knew it was written ages ago, I had question for you.
What do you mean when you say that you don't get along as well as expected with SEE-Se?
I'm a Fi-IEE and I get along much better with Te-SLIs than Si-SLIs and my relationship with Fi-ESIs are better than expected :) .
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,227 Posts
Hey there, Figure. I saw this post and even though I knew it was written ages ago, I had question for you.
What do you mean when you say that you don't get along as well as expected with SEE-Se?
I'm a Fi-IEE and I get along much better with Te-SLIs than Si-SLIs and my relationship with Fi-ESIs are better than expected :) .
So the general idea I've come up with since writing this article is that in the case of Irrational type, Rational subtype (IEE-Fi, SLI-Te, etc) the Creative function and Hidden Agenda are almost as crucial to Dualization as exposure to the Suggestive in general. Not to suggest that your HA and Suggestive are at the same level, but that you specifically crave Creative-HA interactions almost as much as Suggestive-Base.

That whole idea started when I kept noticing that Dual interactions between various subtypes took place in different ways. If you have any insight on IEE and SLI I'd be very interested to hear what you have to say in the way of details. But with ILI and SEE, subtype appears to be a significant factor. ILI-Ni and SEE-Se, for example, tend to have a lot of banter, aggression-on-passiveness, goading and dodging antics, and rapidly changing conversation topics, many of which don't really have a pragmatic purpose. In my interactions with SEE-Fi, the topic sporadically changes, but there's much more exchange of personal opinions and experiences, advising, checking of viewpoints and ideas against personal takes.

FWIW the SLI subtypes, as well as IEE strike me as also being very different from each other. The SLI-Te's are, like myself, focused on productivity and practical activities whereas the Si ones (and I don't mean this offensively) seem to ramble on over everyday topics in an eccentric way. ILI-Ni's can be very soft-spoken and calm and just sort of leave you sitting there to do something, whereas I talk a lot and actually feel uncomfortable if I'm not in some way initiating or directing something in a conversation.

In some cases, Te SLI/ILI and Fi IEE/SEE can look more alike than the same type/different subtype, and conversations feel more like Identical/Dual. The same logic may apply to all types/subtypes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,961 Posts
But with ILI and SEE, subtype appears to be a significant factor. ILI-Ni and SEE-Se, for example, tend to have a lot of banter, aggression-on-passiveness, goading and dodging antics, and rapidly changing conversation topics, many of which don't really have a pragmatic purpose. In my interactions with SEE-Fi, the topic sporadically changes, but there's much more exchange of personal opinions and experiences, advising, checking of viewpoints and ideas against personal takes.

FWIW the SLI subtypes, as well as IEE strike me as also being very different from each other. The SLI-Te's are, like myself, focused on productivity and practical activities whereas the Si ones (and I don't mean this offensively) seem to ramble on over everyday topics in an eccentric way. ILI-Ni's can be very soft-spoken and calm and just sort of leave you sitting there to do something, whereas I talk a lot and actually feel uncomfortable if I'm not in some way initiating or directing something in a conversation.
I've noticed the same thing regarding rational vs. irrational subtypes which made it seem like they virtually need to have different write-ups about their dualization scenarios. The way Si-SEi and Ne-ILEs dualize and the kinds of challenges they encounter along their dualization scenario, are significantly different from the duality of Fe-SEIs and Ti-ILEs. In the former the Si-Ne opposition is crucial; for the later it's the Ti-Fe, which creates an entirely different set of ways to relate and possible problems. Up to date, I haven't found any articles or anywhere on forums explaining this, so I'm going by personal observations and experiences.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
I'm still a long way's away from applying the subtypes efficiently, but there are a few types I'm confident in detecting subtypes such as ILE's, SLE's, ESI's. They play a larger role in a person's behavior than I expected and unlike my initial guess that ILE-Ti's and LII-Ne's would be almost the same, they don't seem any more similar than Mirrors with matching subtypes. Here's just some of my general observations.

SLE-Se's have a social charm to them and although they can be rude occasionally, they can relate to relate to people well enough that they don't set off "red flags" or appear genuinely ill-wishing (Fi PoLR but valued more than in the logical subtype). They tend to appear stereotypically Beta, they love competitions with a playful side to it. Love to play practical jokes, they have a zest for life and love to have fun.
SLE-Ti's are pretty critical and at times intimidating. Even when they mean well, they're a lot more likely to accidentally step on people's boundaries by not reading how people are feeling deep down. It takes a lot longer to get to know them and even when they are comfortable talking about personal values, it still has an "I must do the right thing whether I want to or not" emphasis on justice. Their view of morality is quite rigid and centered around Te. More ambitious than the sensory subtype, wants to achieve greatness. They resemble the NT Researcher club and the Gamma quadra.

ILE-Ne's are the poster boys of the Alpha quadra and childlike sexuality. Creative, optimistic, entertaining, and happy-go-lucky. They can be assertive, but they defend their views with tact and make good impressions. Very good at reading people. They are usually negligent of their surroundings and can appear more naïve then they are because they care very little about "the here and now". They're sense of humor is amusing and involves a lot of parody, wordplay, and innuendo. ILE-Ne guys tend to like older women, idk why it's just something I noticed.
ILE-Ti's are a lot more businesslike and street-smart. They don't give off the aggressive or intimidating vibe SLE-Ti's do so much as a calm, level-headed, assertive one. They dress more formally than the intuitive subtypes and walk at a faster pace. Can be a little crude or harsh at times and like the SLE-Ti's they tend to have a Te-centric view of morality, focused on doing right things rather than feeling them. Sense of humor is similar to the intuitive subtype but somewhat sharper (for example, they may prefer critical satire or over a light-hearted parody). Tend to resemble Beta types with their mix of directness and calmness.

ESI-Fi's have a peaceful, laid-back vibe. They don't warm up easily, but have a way of putting people at ease in their presence. More artistic and imaginative interests than the Se subtype, may express themselves with tattoos, creative story-telling, or a sense of style that matches their inner identity. Able to lay down the law easily, but prefer to just let people live their lives and let them live theirs without imposition. Great listeners. Tend to have sophisticated tastes in literature, music, and art. Their demeanor has many Delta characteristics.
ESI-Se's appear pretty suspicious and distant towards others until they get to know them well. Usually interested in administration, tools and machines, video games, tasks that require hands-on learning. Their sense of humor can be pretty dark, although only "their people" see this side of them since they don't like unexpected company. Not constantly assertive since they're usually easy-going, but will be if something matters to them. Like to dress well but not flashy. If someone gets on their bad side, may get physically confrontational. They appear stereotypically Gamma to strangers, but can have a Beta vibe when in company of "their own" private circle. The rapper Eminem is a great example of an ESI-Se IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
178 Posts
So the general idea I've come up with since writing this article is that in the case of Irrational type, Rational subtype (IEE-Fi, SLI-Te, etc) the Creative function and Hidden Agenda are almost as crucial to Dualization as exposure to the Suggestive in general. Not to suggest that your HA and Suggestive are at the same level, but that you specifically crave Creative-HA interactions almost as much as Suggestive-Base.

That whole idea started when I kept noticing that Dual interactions between various subtypes took place in different ways. If you have any insight on IEE and SLI I'd be very interested to hear what you have to say in the way of details. But with ILI and SEE, subtype appears to be a significant factor. ILI-Ni and SEE-Se, for example, tend to have a lot of banter, aggression-on-passiveness, goading and dodging antics, and rapidly changing conversation topics, many of which don't really have a pragmatic purpose. In my interactions with SEE-Fi, the topic sporadically changes, but there's much more exchange of personal opinions and experiences, advising, checking of viewpoints and ideas against personal takes.

FWIW the SLI subtypes, as well as IEE strike me as also being very different from each other. The SLI-Te's are, like myself, focused on productivity and practical activities whereas the Si ones (and I don't mean this offensively) seem to ramble on over everyday topics in an eccentric way. ILI-Ni's can be very soft-spoken and calm and just sort of leave you sitting there to do something, whereas I talk a lot and actually feel uncomfortable if I'm not in some way initiating or directing something in a conversation.

In some cases, Te SLI/ILI and Fi IEE/SEE can look more alike than the same type/different subtype, and conversations feel more like Identical/Dual. The same logic may apply to all types/subtypes.
I giggled when I saw you said you'd be very interested in hearing about my opinions regarding duality with different subtypes (dat Te-HA). I'm going to need more time to make more coherent observations but here's something I noticed:
For us, Fi-IEEs, we tend to get along with and understand Si-SLIs very well but there isn't always a deeply magnetic draw. It feels like a very relaxing friendship what with the emphasis on Si-values. It feels like we're with family. Whereas, I do notice, that I am more drawn to Te/Si-LSEs than I am to Si-SLIs. With Si-SLIs, there's a lot of ... comfort, it feels like boredom, sometimes. There is productivity and we do manage to take care of each other's dual seeking needs. But I feel like, we often get less accomplished together.
I read somewhere that Fi-IEEs are like Gamma SFs and it's true to an extent and if that's the case, then Te-SLIs feel very Gamma-NT to me, which is great because I feel like they are more intellectual, ambitious and driven than the Si-SLIs (who are lovely as well but different); so they are the kind of people whose presence I find more fulfilling. Si-SLIs can be attractive (but perhaps I don't usually find them to be so due to enneagram issues) but with Te-XLI/LXEs, the mutual attraction/draw is more ... intense/deeper, I think.
Btw, the kind of interaction, you mentioned with Fi-SEEs reminded me of how my conversations are with the Te-ILI I like :) ; except there are many Ne/Ni disagreements. There's a lot of Fi/Te bonding involved (kind of like we're mapping each other and checking for emotional landmines, but that could be because he and I have Enneagram 8 as our gut fixes) .
These are my thoughts for now and I hope we can chat elsewhere, another time, Figure. I hope to speak more about my experiences later :) .
EDITED TO ADD: I think my relationship with Si-SLIs feel like activity. The thing is both Si-SLIs and I are introverted; as someone who is in Fi-mode so often, I am usually in want of someone more extroverted (in a Te-ish way) and who can get me out of the Fi-Si loop and help me do stuff. Not that Si-SLIs can't do it but they are care less about Te things than Te-SLIs who seem to live for Te stuff.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,435 Posts
I have no idea what my subtype is.

Anyone have any insight/descriptions/experiences related to SEE-Se vs SEE-Fi?

I'm pretty sure my partner is ILI-Te (people sometimes think he's LIE but he's definitely ILI). I haven't seemed to notice any major issues between us, what I understand of duality seems to match our relationship quite well.

I seem to gel better with ILI-Te over ILI-Ni, in general.

EDIT: I also get on much better with xEE/ExI's of the Fi-subtype. Not sure if that is related at all.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top