["?"]

I did not realize that any of this had taken. There have been problems with our server at work and last weekend while sanitizing my computer, I deleted my registry resulting in getting an error message that my TLDR is missing. I had writtent a plethora of information on Jung's theory v. MBTI, but don't have the time or inclination to redo it.

I will say that based on Carl Jung's theory certain things have to be considered about how we think about type;

1) Jung alludes to all people having a preference for each function and implies there is no unique function. Based on that, I think he would have argued that intuitive types are no more rare than sensing types.
2) Jung alludes to the dichotomies only to define how they work in unison as functions-attitudes.
3) Finally but not inclusively, Jung's discussion about the auxiliary function has to make one wonder whether Socionics is right that all judging/perceiving functions (regardless of attitude) will be primary and can be readily seen by an onlooker.

In reviewing his information again, I think that I now understand that most likely I had bought into the whole dichotomy theory and had taken the E/I too literal. I most likely use Se as my primary, however as someone stated here the auxiliary function may be the most easily recognized in ourselves.