Typing people by identifying the extravert function

[alcea rosea]

This thread made me think if I could type people by identifying their extraverted function.

So, when trying to type introverted people, I should try to identify their secondary function first instead of dominant function because their secondary function is extraverted function which is visible for people.

If typing with extroverted function would be possible, then I could group MBTI types according to their first extraverted function. The groups would then be:

Extraverted Sensation, Se: SP's
Extraverted Intuition, Ne: NP's
Extraverted Thinking, Te: TJ's
Extraverted Feeling, Fe: FJ's

The question here is that does dominant and secondary extraverted function resemble each other, e.g does Se look the same when it's dominant or secondary function?

If this way of typing people would be sensible, then I could do typing as follows:

1) indentify: I or E
2) first extravert function: Se, Ne, Te or Fe
3) first introvert function: Si, Ni, Ti or Fi.

What do you thnk of this way of identifying MBTI types?

[Jennifer]

Well, this is partly where the MBTI J/P function pair came from. When you find a J extrovert, you know their primary is a Judging function; when you find a J introvert, you know their primary is a Perceiving function. It helps with categorization.

And you can't see the internal workings of someone, you only first observe their extroverted tendencies until you talk to them. So this is generally how impromptu determination of MBTI type *is* done (imo); the first point of contact is the Primary for extroverts and the Secondary for introverts.

So for example if you observe someone with strong, comfortable Fe, you can test to see whether they are one of four types: ESFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ, or INFJ. Chances are they'll be one of these; and if you sense a lot of discrepancy or find that none really fit, you'll need to potentially see if the Fe you are observing is actually part of a developed tertiary/inferior.

Now, if you already are sure you're dealing with an introvert, then yes, the most visible function will often be their secondary. (This is just a rule of thumb; there are situations in which the primary comes to the front... basically in situations where the introvert feels comfortable showing their inner colors. This can be due to youth/inexperience, using the primary without tempering it with the secondary; or it can happen because of maturity, because the introvert has confidence to allow others to see the primary; or likewise simply because the introvert is in a "safe" setting and sees no need to screen/protect themselves with the secondary.)

[alcea rosea]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

So for example if you observe someone with strong, comfortable Fe, you can test to see whether they are one of four types: ESFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ, or INFJ. Chances are they'll be one of these; and if you sense a lot of discrepancy or find that none really fit, you'll need to potentially see if the Fe you are observing is actually part of a developed tertiary/inferior.

This was really a new realization for me because until now I have identified people without any method based on only to feelings, Keirsey’s temperaments and identifying E-I, S-N, T-F and J-P. I have noticed that I do confuse e.g. ESTP's and ENFP's at times but no wonder because they have the same dominant function.

Now I have a third way (SP, NP, TJ and FJ) of looking at types, the first being Keirsey’s temperament and second MBTI original grouping (SF, ST, NT and NF). Maybe I can now be a bit better in identifying types?

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by Alcearos

This was really a new realization for me because until now I have identified people without any method based on only to feelings, Keirsey's temperaments and identifying E-I, S-N, T-F and J-P. I have noticed that I do confuse e.g. ESTP's and ENFP's at times but no wonder because they have the same dominant function.

Now I have a third way (SP, NP, TJ and FJ) of looking at types, the first being Keirsey’s temperament and second MBTI original grouping (SF, ST, NT and NF). Maybe I can now be a bit better in identifying types?

Yes, I think that's sort of the way to do it: You use multiple methods and try to find the "best point of convergence."

So you have the Keirsey archetypes: SP, SJ, NT, NF
And you have the standard MBTI archetypes: ST, SF, NT, NF
And you have the sixteen MBTI types themselves: XXXX
And you have knowledge of how all the extroverted functions "look."

Then, over time, you will develop a sense for how the introverted functions impact observable behavior. But that just takes experience.

[Wandering]

Originally Posted by Alcearos

If this way of typing people would be sensible, then I could do typing as follows:

1) indentify: I or E
2) first extravert function: Se, Ne, Te or Fe
3) first introvert function: Si, Ni, Ti or Fi.

What do you thnk of this way of identifying MBTI types?

Sounds extremely sensible to me

Here are a few "problems" I can see that you need to be aware of, though:

1- The one Jennifer mentioned: sometimes a well-developed Tertiary can interfere. Since we're speaking of Extraverted functions, this would be a problem in particular with Extraverts that you don't know so well, or that you know in a particular setting which calls heavily on their Tertiary function.

2- Sometimes we can mistake an Introverted function for an Extraverted one. My usual example is how I mistook my son's Tertiary Fi (if I typed him correctly as an INTJ) for an Auxiliary Fe (I thought he was INFJ at first), because he is so spontaneously affectionate around the family. It's only when he started going to kindergarten, and showed real emotional restraint, that I realised I got something wrong. Upon studying the alternate possibilities, I came to realise that a Tertiary Fi can look very much like Fe as long as the INTJ is around people he loves.

3- Shadow functions! Some people have a very good relationship with one or both of their first two Shadow functions (much more rarely with the last two). So, for example, an INFJ with a very good use of Ne could confuse you into thinking that they might be an NP.

4- Shadow functions still, but from another angle: some people may NOT have a very good relationship with their Shadow functions, and yet use them a lot. This usually has negative consequences, but you don't necessarily see it. For example, an INFJ in a self-defeating mood may use Ne a lot to shoot down possible positive scenarios that you would offer him. Again, this could confuse you into thinking that he might be an NP, if you don't realise that his use of Ne is not a healthy one.

I hope I'm not overwhelming you? I'm not trying to discourage you, not at all! In fact, turned around, those "problems" can be used as positive tools! Like, if you notice that someone you've already typed as a probable Extravert uses an Extraverted function a lot but in a not-so-controlled or not-so-effective manner, this can clue you in to the fact that you might actually be observing their Tertiary. Or, if you know that someone is not feeling great, and they keep using one particular Extraverted function to make themselves miserable, then you may assume you've found a main Shadow function of theirs. See what I mean?

I personally find all that stuff fascinating, so I apologise if I did overwhelm you!

[alcea rosea]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

Well, this is partly where the MBTI J/P function pair came from. When you find a J extrovert, you know their primary is a Judging function; when you find a J introvert, you know their primary is a Perceiving function. It helps with categorization.

And you can't see the internal workings of someone, you only first observe their extroverted tendencies until you talk to them. So this is generally how impromptu determination of MBTI type *is* done (imo); the first point of contact is the Primary for extroverts and the Secondary for introverts.

So for example if you observe someone with strong, comfortable Fe, you can test to see whether they are one of four types: ESFJ, ENFJ, ISFJ, or INFJ. Chances are they'll be one of these; and if you sense a lot of discrepancy or find that none really fit, you'll need to potentially see if the Fe you are observing is actually part of a developed tertiary/inferior.

Now, if you already are sure you're dealing with an introvert, then yes, the most visible function will often be their secondary. (This is just a rule of thumb; there are situations in which the primary comes to the front... basically in situations where the introvert feels comfortable showing their inner colors. This can be due to youth/inexperience, using the primary without tempering it with the secondary; or it can happen because of maturity, because the introvert has confidence to allow others to see the primary; or likewise simply because the introvert is in a "safe" setting and sees no need to screen/protect themselves with the secondary.)

Originally Posted by Wandering

Sounds extremely sensible to me

Here are a few "problems" I can see that you need to be aware of, though:

1- The one Jennifer mentioned: sometimes a well-developed Tertiary can interfere. Since we're speaking of Extraverted functions, this would be a problem in particular with Extraverts that you don't know so well, or that you know in a particular setting which calls heavily on their Tertiary function.

2- Sometimes we can mistake an Introverted function for an Extraverted one. My usual example is how I mistook my son's Tertiary Fi (if I typed him correctly as an INTJ) for an Auxiliary Fe (I thought he was INFJ at first), because he is so spontaneously affectionate around the family. It's only when he started going to kindergarten, and showed real emotional restraint, that I realised I got something wrong. Upon studying the alternate possibilities, I came to realise that a Tertiary Fi can look very much like Fe as long as the INTJ is around people he loves.

3- Shadow functions! Some people have a very good relationship with one or both of their first two Shadow functions (much more rarely with the last two). So, for example, an INFJ with a very good use of Ne could confuse you into thinking that they might be an NP.

4- Shadow functions still, but from another angle: some people may NOT have a very good relationship with their Shadow functions, and yet use them a lot. This usually has negative consequences, but you don't necessarily see it. For example, an INFJ in a self-defeating mood may use Ne a lot to shoot down possible positive scenarios that you would offer him. Again, this could confuse you into thinking that he might be an NP, if you don't realise that his use of Ne is not a healthy one.

I hope I'm not overwhelming you? I'm not trying to discourage you, not at all! In fact, turned around, those "problems" can be used as positive tools! Like, if you notice that someone you've already typed as a probable Extravert uses an Extraverted function a lot but in a not-so-controlled or not-so-effective manner, this can clue you in to the fact that you might actually be observing their Tertiary. Or, if you know that someone is not feeling great, and they keep using one particular Extraverted function to make themselves miserable, then you may assume you've found a main Shadow function of theirs. See what I mean?

I personally find all that stuff fascinating, so I apologise if I did overwhelm you!

Thanks for this! It will take some time for me to think this function thing through but all feedback is always useful.

[Jennifer]

Oh no... shadow functions!

Good points, though. And it highlights how much of this is an "art" and/or learned through experience, rather than just a theoretical framework.

[alcea rosea]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

Oh no... shadow functions!

Good points, though. And it highlights how much of this is an "art" and/or learned through experience, rather than just a theoretical framework.

Yes, "art" is a good word describing this!

I think the best thing for a newcomer to MBTI would be to see a real person of each MBTI type (and both genders) so there would be something to compare to. When all types have not been seen, it is difficult to type the kind of types that are not familiar to you. Example: I haven't identified any ISFJ's or ISFP's until now so I have no information where to compare information about how ISFJ's or ISFP's feel like.

When meeting new people (e.g. at work) I usually ask if they had heard of the MBTI and then I'll ask their types. That's a good way to start identifying types althought there are risks there too (e.g people might think I'm weird , they have mistyped themselves or they don't want to tell me and then I'll of course respect their choice of not telling).

Anyway, now I have added one method of my MBTI tool kit.

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by Alcearos

I think the best thing for a newcomer to MBTI would be to see a real person of each MBTI type (and both genders) so there would be something to compare to. When all types have not been seen, it is difficult to type the kind of types that are not familiar to you. Example: I haven't identified any ISFJ's or ISFP's until now so I have no information where to compare information about how ISFJ's or ISFP's feel like.

Yes, examples of both genders are important (because I think gender coupled with culture) impacts expression of gender type.

But it can't even stop there. Within each of the sixteen types, you will find variations that might be confusing because at first you'd think they weren't the same "type."

As a relevant example, consider female INFJ members CascadeMN, Toonia, and Cafe. Cascade (to me) seems to be right in the middle, "typical" of the type, Toonie relies more on her heavily developed tertiary (Ti) and does a great deal of analysis, and Cafe leans towards more ISFJ behavior outwardly even while she clearly has that core Ni ability to shift through many different paradigms [opposed to ISFJs, who have one "correct" internal map of the world].

Anyway, that part comes later. And these distinctions are probably testable within the MBTI Step II.

[alcea rosea]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

Yes, examples of both genders are important (because I think gender coupled with culture) impacts expression of gender type.

But it can't even stop there. Within each of the sixteen types, you will find variations that might be confusing because at first you'd think they weren't the same "type." .

That's true.

As a relevant example, consider female INFJ members CascadeMN, Toonia, and Cafe. Cascade (to me) seems to be right in the middle, "typical" of the type, Toonie relies more on her heavily developed tertiary (Ti) and does a great deal of analysis, and Cafe leans towards more ISFJ behavior outwardly even while she clearly has that core Ni ability to shift through many different paradigms [opposed to ISFJs, who have one "correct" internal map of the world]..

Ok, I have to admit that my knowledge of MBTI does not reach this level of analysis (yet).

Anyway, that part comes later. And these distinctions are probably testable within the MBTI Step II.

Could you tell me about MBTI Step II. What is that all about?