Quote:
Originally Posted by "?"
I am a bit perplexed by John Beebe's theory. Meyers-Briggs only alludes to four of the eight functions, allowing us to infer that either we only use four and/or she simply states the most natural and the two least natural. As a result, Lenore Thomson's lasagna theory shows a type's secession in a different way than Beebe, with the dominant function and auxilary being first and second, followed by the other four remaining roles, and then ending it with the teritiary and weakest function. Beebe seems to say that the four alluded to by Meyers-Briggs is our four most used functions, followed in some seccession by the other four remaining. Any thoughts from your own experiences how that plays out?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Badlands
1. Dominant (Ti) - 38.4
2/3. Auxiliary (Ne)/Devilish (Fi) - 36.4
4. Critical (Ni) - 34.3
5. Inferior (Fe) - 26.5
6. Trickster (Se) - 24.4
7. Tertiary (Si) - 23.2
8. Backup (Te) - 21
Based on my results, I would definitely say the rigid descriptions of function development are false. Your dominant and auxiliary are the two that are certain to be used and develop fully before puberty, while the remaining functions can be embraced or shunned depending on social conditioning (sorted in order from easiest to hardest to develop though). The development of Fi was heavily encouraged when I was younger (language therapy), and the people that I loved most used it a lot, so it eventually became second nature after a couple of years of depression. I mainly use Fi for extroverted purposes, however (I rant about my personal opinions as a bonding tool much of the time, instead of for my own worth and purpose).
|
If we only used four, then all types other than SP's and NJ's would never perceive (see, hear, smell, taste, touch) the current reality.
So the Cognitive Processes test seems to explain it the best. The strengths of the functions won't always match the supposed development order, but your type will still be determined by which "role" they play in your life.
Beebe and Berens do seem to leave a question mark as to whether the shadows are supposed to follow the last four in the same order, or whether they truly "shadow" the firstfour in the same level of strength. The results we have all been posting would seem to go either way.