# Thread: Archetype Pair classes

1. ## Archetype Pair classes

Both dominant and auxiliary (lead and supporting) share the designation of "preferred", and by themselves determine the one-in-sixteen type.

The tertiary and inferior develop later, and the tertiary is known as "the eternal child" or "relief", while the inferior remains immature even longer. The way we behave with it is also described as "childish" and immature. So we see a common thread with both postions of functions: immaturity.

Likewise, the fifth and sixth (in the nearest area of the shadow) are "opposing personality" and "immobilizing" or "critical". The common theme here is resistance to something, either present or future.

The deepest shadow consist of "deceiving" and "destructive". Both share in common a regretting of actions taken with the function.

So I would name the four resultant pairs:

Preferred
Immature
Resistant
Regrettable

This is useful for grouping together the functions shared in common by either the two-letter function attitude combinations (SP, SJ, NP, NJ, TP, TJ, FP, FJ) or three letter "intelligence types": STP, STJ, NTP, NTJ, SFP, SFJ, NFP, NFJ), for whom either one or both functions wil fall into the same pair. Keirsey had said that I/E was the least important factor, and a statistical study supported it. So when speaking of TP's, for instance, we can mention "resistant Te", or "regrettable Se". When talking about NTP's, they will both have "immature Si".

2. there are many theories on the order of development and how they are utilized.
i have even seen some theories that involve axis like Pe and Je working as one in relief or even Pe Ji Pi all working together.

Personally i like the one thats works as:
ex: ENTJ
(1,2) dom + aux = your main way of operating Te Ni
(3,5) tert + opp = your relief personality Ti Se
(4,6) aspiration + discovery = aspirational personality Fi Ne

There is "evidence" (its psychology, so standards for evidence are loose) that the 5th or oppositional function developes rather quickly and strongly. Logically, the next most likely to pair with it would be the tertiary. From there it also makes sense that the discovery and the aspirational would pair.

3. Oh, so that set you just gave is about when they develop.

Je/Pe would be known as the "extraverted face". (And of course, the introverted pair, the "introverted face").

Then, there's the dom/inf. "spine", and the aux/ter "arm".
I'm not saying to chose one pairing system over the others. They're ALL useful! I just wanted to come up with specific names for the last three consecutive pairs. The first one was always known as the "preferred" pair. The second is called the "nonpreferred" pair. But "nonpreferred" can technically mean any of the last six functions. So I wanted to give the ter/inf a better more specific name that matches what they shared in common. They both tend to be "immature" (in one way or another).
Likewise, the shadow pairs.

4. Originally Posted by Eric B
Oh, so that set you just gave is about when they develop.

Je/Pe would be known as the "extraverted face". (And of course, the introverted pair, the "introverted face").

Then, there's the dom/inf. "spine", and the aux/ter "arm".
I'm not saying to chose one pairing system over the others. They're ALL useful! I just wanted to come up with specific names for the last three consecutive pairs. The first one was always known as the "preferred" pair. The second is called the "nonpreferred" pair. But "nonpreferred" can technically mean any of the last six functions. So I wanted to give the ter/inf a better more specific name that matches what they shared in common. They both tend to be "immature" (in one way or another).
Likewise, the shadow pairs.
i would imagine that there probably isnt a "set way". so your right, they are probably ALL usefull.

I especially like the spine idea. It does seem that at some point:

ENXP: oh shit! whats the point of this Ne if i have nothing to show! no projects finished! Si
EXFJ: oh shit! whats the point of all this social customs if none of it makes any flipping sense! Ti
IXTP: oh shit! whats the point of this knowledge if i cant even relate to anyone! Fe.

i know im being as precise as a dump truck haha... but hopefully we get the point.

I do prefer the development theory over what you proposed though. It just seems to fit better from what ive observed in people and myself. However, i imagine that theres room for MANY theories.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•