16 replies to this topic

[Galen]

Now, I know very little about the specifics of DCNH, but I'd like to think there's at least something to it. If nothing else, I kinda think of it as a secondary/supplementary temperament that is sorta imbued into the personality, giving it depth or something. Whether or not it means anything about valuing one function over the other I'm not sure.

Opinions plz

[counter-everything]

The only system that is true has more subtypes than types like a tree has more leaves than branches.

[Galen]

counter-everything, on 16 November 2010 - 01:00 AM, said:

The only system that is true has more subtypes than types like a tree has more leaves than branches.

Doesn't that apply to most trees?

[Gilly]

I think of it primarily as a modulation of temperament that helps to dictate roles in group behavior. Although IMO it is really only the first function of the "second type." I think the normal system of subtypes still applies, but is more of an indicator of values relative to intra-quadra placement.

[tcaudilllg]

Here's what DCNH is. You've heard theories and whatnot about it, here's what it ACTUALLY is.

It's often the case that the discoverer of a concept is not the best person to explain it. So let it be with Gulenko.

DCNH results from two dichotomous traits, forward/backward progression in the information metabolism position ring ("Ring of Model A") and intellectual responsibility vs intellectual abstinence. Basically, D and C differ from N and H in that D and C people are willing to put their neck out, while N and H people are content to back up D and C, respectively. (H won't even back up C, only N will do backup so D generally has a 2:1 advantage over C in a fight... there are exceptions because H can behave like N if it wants, of course, but usually that only seems to happen when duality is involved, in my experience).

The original subtype system was based on accepting/producing, which is synonymous with forward/backward ring progression. Gulenko observed that producing subtypes used their creating functions more often than their base functions; that's because the ring order is reversed compared to the order he originally discovered (1 thru 4 and back to 1 again). Producing subtype people aim to discover and uncover, while accepting subtypes try to influence their environments directly. Of those, H generally explores territory identified by C, while N upholds the dictates and declarations of D.

The adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely" applies most directly to D subtypes. Take Obama as an example.

[Galen]

tcaudilllg, on 16 November 2010 - 12:54 PM, said:

Here's what DCNH is. You've heard theories and whatnot about it, here's what it ACTUALLY is.

It's often the case that the discoverer of a concept is not the best person to explain it. So let it be with Gulenko.

DCNH results from two dichotomous traits, forward/backward progression in the information metabolism position ring ("Ring of Model A") and intellectual responsibility vs intellectual abstinence. Basically, D and C differ from N and H in that D and C people are willing to put their neck out, while N and H people are content to back up D and C, respectively. (H won't even back up C, only N will do backup so D generally has a 2:1 advantage over C in a fight... there are exceptions because H can behave like N if it wants, of course, but usually that only seems to happen when duality is involved, in my experience).

The original subtype system was based on accepting/producing, which is synonymous with forward/backward ring progression. Gulenko observed that producing subtypes used their creating functions more often than their base functions; that's because the ring order is reversed compared to the order he originally discovered (1 thru 4 and back to 1 again). Producing subtype people aim to discover and uncover, while accepting subtypes try to influence their environments directly. Of those, H generally explores territory identified by C, while N upholds the dictates and declarations of D.

The adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely" applies most directly to D subtypes. Take Obama as an example.

Hmm, interesting stuff. Thanks for the explanation ;o

What do you mean by "intellectual responsibility vs intellectual abstinence?" It sounds like a favoring of rational vs irrational functions, with introverted/extroverted IEs being determined by the accepting/producing dichotomy.

[tcaudilllg]

Galen, on 16 November 2010 - 07:59 PM, said:

tcaudilllg, on 16 November 2010 - 12:54 PM, said:

Here's what DCNH is. You've heard theories and whatnot about it, here's what it ACTUALLY is.

It's often the case that the discoverer of a concept is not the best person to explain it. So let it be with Gulenko.

DCNH results from two dichotomous traits, forward/backward progression in the information metabolism position ring ("Ring of Model A") and intellectual responsibility vs intellectual abstinence. Basically, D and C differ from N and H in that D and C people are willing to put their neck out, while N and H people are content to back up D and C, respectively. (H won't even back up C, only N will do backup so D generally has a 2:1 advantage over C in a fight... there are exceptions because H can behave like N if it wants, of course, but usually that only seems to happen when duality is involved, in my experience).

The original subtype system was based on accepting/producing, which is synonymous with forward/backward ring progression. Gulenko observed that producing subtypes used their creating functions more often than their base functions; that's because the ring order is reversed compared to the order he originally discovered (1 thru 4 and back to 1 again). Producing subtype people aim to discover and uncover, while accepting subtypes try to influence their environments directly. Of those, H generally explores territory identified by C, while N upholds the dictates and declarations of D.

The adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely" applies most directly to D subtypes. Take Obama as an example.

Hmm, interesting stuff. Thanks for the explanation ;o

What do you mean by "intellectual responsibility vs intellectual abstinence?" It sounds like a favoring of rational vs irrational functions, with introverted/extroverted IEs being determined by the accepting/producing dichotomy.

I responded to you here:
http://www.progressi...=asc&highlight=

[borderline]

whats my DCNH type?

[Gilly]

Allie, on 17 November 2010 - 11:51 AM, said:

give me attention

fiksed

[discojoe]

Gilly, on 17 November 2010 - 11:59 AM, said:

Allie, on 17 November 2010 - 11:51 AM, said:

give me attention

fiksed

lol at teh irony

[Gilly]

takes one to know one...

[discojoe]

Allie, I think you're N.

[Nick]

N-LSI-Se is pretty uh... spartan-esque. But then again, Allie has ice in lieu of bone marrow.

[Gilly]

Lol that is a pretty soldier type.

[typhon]

Here is some good basic info on DCNH theory.

Asthon posted this image of the brain and how functions relate to different areas of it:

As you can see, the Je functions are in one area of the brain, the Pi, in another, and so are the Ji, and Pe. So perhaps the D subtype correlates to using the front left lobe of the brain , the front right to the C subtype, the back left to the H, and the back right to the N. Preferences for these centers of the brain lead to different DCNH subtypes.

borderline, on 17 November 2010 - 11:51 AM, said:

whats my DCNH type?

Make it funny next time.

[borderline]

Gilly, on 18 November 2010 - 02:36 PM, said:

Nick, on 18 November 2010 - 07:13 AM, said:

discojoe, on 17 November 2010 - 04:36 PM, said:

Allie, I think you're N.

N-LSI-Se is pretty uh... spartan-esque. But then again, Allie has ice in lieu of bone marrow.

Lol that is a pretty soldier type.

descriptions? i'm not a soldier type

[EyeSeeCold]

tcaudilllg, on 16 November 2010 - 11:16 PM, said:

I responded to you here:
http://www.progressi...=asc&highlight=

Anyone have access?