# Time for some subtype speculation~!



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Here's a thing I thought up about subtypes (like Fi sub, Te sub, etc). Whenever we talk about these subtypes, we say stuff like SEE-Fi uses more Fi than SEE-Se, which is correct, but kind of vague. What I thought of here may make a little more sense in terms of explaining why subtypes are:
1) more important than we think
2) lead to different behavior in different scenarios

I'll use SEE as an example (cause it's the best type). 

SEE-Se can be explained as having access to both +Se and -Se, despite the SEE only being described as having +Se. This explains several behavioral things:

1. The SEE-Se is more playful and adventurous, as well as "conquering". Because they have -Se too, they are more prone to exploit vulnerabilities and hit people's soft spots, and be more focused on getting the tactical advantage in life, in addition to having the +Se characteristic of stubbornly protecting their own advantages.

2. -Se is possessed by betas (and deltas), whose sensors are all STs, which makes SEE-Se more ST-ish as well. (Explains the Se sub's stronger connection to their Te). More practical, more straightforward and matter-of-fact, less thoughtful.

SEE-Fi can be explained as having access to both +Fi and -Fi, despite the SEE only being described as having -Fi. This explains several behavioral things: 

1. The SEE-Fi is more mellow and restrained, as well as "moralizing". Because they have +Fi too, they are more prone to preserving positive moods, tones and relationships, giving them a diplomatic and tactful bent. They may form stronger opinions on things they like and dislike, and are more focused on enforcing moral standards, in addition to the -Fi characteristic of eliminating/pointing out negative and repulsive relationships and aspects of life.

2. +Fi is possessed by deltas (and betas), whose feelers are all NFs, which makes SEE-Fi more NF-ish as well. (Explains the Fi sub's stronger connection to their Ni). More interested in finding the conceptual and personal meaning to their pursuits, more connected to the potential of people and humanity, less impulsive.

Note that this is just an idea! Anyway, what do you think? I like thinking of subtypes this way, because it easily explains why people of the same type are so different from each other, and have some strengths/characteristics of types not in their own quadra.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

@Night Huntress
Have you looked at the DCNH system?


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> @_Night Huntress_
> Have you looked at the DCNH system?


Yes why?


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Yeah, this sort of expands on the vague idea of subtypes-- I like.

Subtype descriptions don't really get at the _how _and _why _of subtypes, just at the _expression _of it, and they still seem kind of... Lacking.

I've also observed that subtypes have certain _other _strengths in cognition (Yes, we're all quite fond of complicating things. :kitteh

Mainly that it _appears _that a type who has a base subtype will have a stronger expression of their mobilizing function, and a type with a creative subtype will have a stronger expression of their suggestive function. And all that this implies-- Because obviously these things work in pairs and there are certain complexities to the dynamics of the system and the way it works.

Man, I've been dyin' to include that in a discussion like this. Good thread topic.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Night Huntress said:


> Yes why?


Well, it's a good bit different than the two-subtype system. It may have some ideas you can merge into your idea, though.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Word Dispenser said:


> Yeah, this sort of expands on the vague idea of subtypes-- I like.
> 
> Subtype descriptions don't really get at the _how _and _why _of subtypes, just at the _expression _of it, and they still seem kind of... Lacking.
> 
> ...


I think there are two ways to explain what you said, and both ideas can be used in conjunction:

1. What I discussed above, which is that (using the SEE example again), possessing access to +Se, which is used by STs, makes the SEE more ST-ish and thus gives them a stronger connection to their thinking function Te, and so on and so forth

or

2. By using the idea of inert and contact functions, which asserts that being inert subtype gives you greater access to your other inert function (similarly applies for contact subtype)

I like the first explanation better  but hey it's a free country.



Jeremy8419 said:


> Well, it's a good bit different than the two-subtype system. It may have some ideas you can merge into your idea, though.


I know. I mainly use DCNH for the behavioral differences it affords, but I feel like the functional elaborations are way too nitpicky and inconsistent with the rest of the theory. At least if one wants to continue following the two-subtype system alongside. 

However useful and interesting DCNH is, it's probably better off staying on the outskirts of Socionics as a mere behavioral difference indicator when it comes to group dynamics (for example when a group has to work on a project together).


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Night Huntress said:


> I think there are two ways to explain what you said, and both ideas can be used in conjunction:
> 
> 1. What I discussed above, which is that (using the SEE example again), possessing access to +Se, which is used by STs, makes the SEE more ST-ish and thus gives them a stronger connection to their thinking function Te, and so on and so forth
> 
> ...


Perhaps some of the DCNH dichotomies? Something you wrote about Fi subtype seemed similar to the inert of the inert/contact DCNH subtype.
Also, you have "positive moods" as part of one of the Fi subtypes, but that's more of a Fe enrichment than a Fi one.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

Interesting ideas, as I've noticed this kind of differences between other SEEs that I know and it's fun to see this as both are type 7s. The SEE-Fi part matches well for one that I met while losing time in tumblr, and that could explain why I had some doubts about her type as she seemed a bit too diplomatic at first.

Now, I guess that doing an extrapolation, ILI-Ni would vibe more as an NF-like type for having -Ni and +Fi (maybe more IEI like despite having crappy Fe) and ILI-Te should look more ST-like at first and tend to be more pragmatic (SLI like maybe, with +Te and a stronger connection to Se, even if Si is weak and devalued).


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

I'm not keen on Lead/Creative subtype theory; it's far too subjective for me, especially when you get into 1Te, 2Te, 3Te, etc. I think this is a step in the right direction.


----------



## Vermillion (Jan 22, 2012)

Jeremy8419 said:


> Perhaps some of the DCNH dichotomies? Something you wrote about Fi subtype seemed similar to the inert of the inert/contact DCNH subtype.


Explain



> Also, you have "positive moods" as part of one of the Fi subtypes, but that's more of a Fe enrichment than a Fi one.


According to my theory, SEE-Fi has access to both +Fi and -Fi. +Fi preserves positive relationships and maintains working moral standards. Maintaining positive moods and tones helps preserve relationships and steer them in the right direction. For the SEE this is accomplished by the unconscious tinkering of demonstrative Fe, whose endeavors aid the goals of creative Fi.



Fried Eggz said:


> I'm not keen on Lead/Creative subtype theory; it's far too subjective for me, especially when you get into 1Te, 2Te, 3Te, etc. I think this is a step in the right direction.


Always thought the 1Te, 2Te stuff was bullshit. Then again I have no idea what it means. But I'm not sure I care lolol



Blue Flare said:


> Interesting ideas, as I've noticed this kind of differences between other SEEs that I know and it's fun to see this as both are type 7s. The SEE-Fi part matches well for one that I met while losing time in tumblr, and that could explain why I had some doubts about her type as she seemed a bit too diplomatic at first.


I think we tend to notice a lot more SEE-Se people because they're way more "obvious". SEE-Fi tends to mistype a lot more because they pass off more easily as introverts or intuitives (or both).



> Now, I guess that doing an extrapolation, ILI-Ni would vibe more as an NF-like type for having -Ni and +Fi (maybe more IEI like despite having crappy Fe) and ILI-Te should look more ST-like at first and tend to be more pragmatic (SLI like maybe, with +Te and a stronger connection to Se, even if Si is weak and devalued).


I just really wonder what this means for dualization. Would an NF-ish SEE theoretically prefer an ST-ish ILI (SEE-Fi and ILI-Te)? But from personal experience, ILI-Ni people have fascinated me a lot more because we have the Fi-Ni focus in common. ILI-Te people seem too different from me because of their greater level of detachment and pragmatism. I feel a bit too floaty for them, and they feel a bit too cold for me.


----------



## Jeremy8419 (Mar 2, 2015)

Night Huntress said:


> Explain





> First dichotomy: contact/distance.
> 
> The first pole indicates the predominance of the need for contact, and the second the need to maintain distance. Into the contact category will fall clearly expressed extroverts as well as extroverted introverts. Distant will be clearly expressed introverts, but also introverted extroverts – those extroverts who avoid intensive contact. The scale of vertness is thus split into four gradations.


So, will one of the two types seem more extroverted and the other more introverted for the two SEE types?



> Strengthening the *linear-assertive *functions Symbol e.gif Symbol p.gif, whatever position this pair occupies within the framework of the sociomodel, forms a dominant subtype (D).
> Strengthening of the *mobile-flexible *functions Symbol f.gif Symbol i.gif leads to the appearance of a creative subtype (C).
> Strengthening of the *balanced-stable *functions Symbol r.gif Symbol l.gif gives a normalizing subtype (N).
> Strengthening the *receptive-adaptive *functions Symbol s.gif Symbol t.gif engenders a harmonizing subtype (H).


On these four, I guess you could call them attitudes or something, your SEE-Fi description had something that sounded like it would be the "balanced-stable" one of the two types.


----------



## Dragheart Luard (May 13, 2013)

Night Huntress said:


> I think we tend to notice a lot more SEE-Se people because they're way more "obvious". SEE-Fi tends to mistype a lot more because they pass off more easily as introverts or intuitives (or both).


This is true, specially if the SEE-Se is also a type 7 as that mix looks a lot like the stereotypical version. My tumblr friend got ISFP in one of those MBTI tests and she was convinced that she was an introvert, but after explaining some basic stuff like the difference between social introversion and cognitive introversion and that ESIs have a different focus overall, then she noticed that she's a 'restrained loose cannon'. I mean this as she's a bit more aware of the consequences of her actions and that sometimes it's pointless to argue with her relatives as she won't convince them about anything. I wonder if being raised by traditional parents kinda forced her to be less impulsive (this friend's parents are Vietnamese, so that may explain why she was restrained and also scolded when she did reckless things during high school). Also I've noticed that she strongly shows dislikes, specially when she talks about an ex that she calls trash and even planned to get some darts for throwing them to a picture that she did, were basically she pasted her ex's face into a trash can LOL



> I just really wonder what this means for dualization. Would an NF-ish SEE theoretically prefer an ST-ish ILI (SEE-Fi and ILI-Te)? But from personal experience, ILI-Ni people have fascinated me a lot more because we have the Fi-Ni focus in common. ILI-Te people seem too different from me because of their greater level of detachment and pragmatism. I feel a bit too floaty for them, and they feel a bit too cold for me.


That's a good question, and I suspect that other things like enneagram may somewhat influence this. I guess that a type 1/3/5 ILI-Te would vibe as too cold and robotic for you, thanks to the pragmatism and the competency focus. Also I guess that the divide is greater if they've neglected Fi too much or haven't been exposed to Fi types. I'm Te sub but I've got along well with a SEE-Fi, but probably helps that she's a type 7 as well and we funnily share ideas despite her living in Canada and I living in this latino shithole lol. I mean, we derp a lot in skype but also discuss about serious stuff and besides some arguments caused by my own stress, that friendship has worked fine during almost one year. So I suspect this may be altered by having things in common.


----------

