Tertiary and Inferior

[Nocapszy]

Utter nonsense.

Naysayers, state your case.

 

[Jack Flak]

I happen to be a yaysayer, so I will state no case.

 

[Nocapszy]

I oughto've made this a poll.

Just a moment -- I'll get Ivy on the horn.

 

[Simplexity]

I think you can increase their effect by sheer work, but its not easy. School basically tested the shit of my Si. Soccer and school combined helped me with my Fe. All in all they are only moderately useful when I chose to wield them consciously, and even then with only passable function.

I think it might have been wiser to focus on my dominant and auxilary though. My dominant function is relatively weak for an INTP.

 

[Nocapszy]

Be more careful in your reading Aimahn.
I'm talking about the concept of tertiary and inferior functions -- the strict, catholicesque shithead ideology that we know now as "the four function model."

It's not but conceptual sputum.

 

[Simplexity]

Hmm. I think it largely depends on your drives. By no means do I think its as static as it's made out to be, nor do I necessarily agree whole heartedly with the concept. But I don't think I'm incorrect in drawing out a general trend.

 

[Jack Flak]

Hmm. I think it largely depends on your drives. By no means do I think its as static as it's made out to be, nor do I necessarily agree whole heartedly with the concept. But I don't think I'm incorrect in drawing out a general trend.

LOL. So you don't think it's the truth, but it's somehow valid still?

Forgive me, Nocapszy's derisiveness rubs off on me from time to time.

 

[redacted]

I definitely think there's a statistically significant correlation between Ti and Fe and Fi and Te. Ditto for Ni/Se and Si/Ne.

I just think that the way they're defined, they work together better. Like Ti/Fe works better (in terms of social fitness) than Ti/Fi (not that this is true in every case).

But that doesn't necessarily mean the model should be so strict. I don't think there should be an order for the 3rd and 4th. I also don't really think it makes sense to think of there being 8 separate functions, but you already know my reasoning about that.

If we think of it as 4 functions with spectrums of I/E, 2 spectrums for Thinking vs. Feeling and Sensing vs. Intuition, and a spectrum for J vs. P, we can produce lots of different 8-function orders (as long as we have translation weights -- simple percentages would do). An INFJ could be Ni Ne Fe Fi ... or Ni Fe Ne Fi ... or Ni Ti Fe Ne ... or, well, lots of possible orders.

Gah I need to figure out how to program some little sliding spectrum things; then I could make a demo of my understanding.


P.S. Every time I say something like "Fe", I mean, imagine breaking the spectrum of I/E for Feeling in two at the middle. Fe is one side, Fi is the other -- they aren't two separate entities as much as two mutually exclusive areas of the same 1 dimensional space.

 

[Jack Flak]

Yeah diss... NO RLY. Taking Fi and Fe by Jung's definitions only, I'm about 10x more Fi.

 

[redacted]

Yeah diss... NO RLY. Taking Fi and Fe by Jung's definitions only, I'm about 10x more Fi.

I haven't seen that. But who knows.

 

[Nocapszy]

I definitely think there's a statistically significant correlation between Ti and Fe and Fi and Te. Ditto for Ni/Se and Si/Ne.

Probably only because that's what you look for more often.
Now, given your history and admission to the belief in an I/E scale for separate functions, I can't really trust that you've got strong enough a grasp on the differences between, and thence can't really trust that you'd be able to accurately assess whether they're really pairing with their two dimensional opposite.

'Sides. Only takes one instance to disprove it. You four function people have to have a perfect score for it to even be plausible.
Maybe it is more common that Ti goes with Fe -- doesn't mean that people ought not to be analyzed as individuals, who break 'the rule'.

I just think that the way they're defined, they work together better. Like Ti/Fe works better (in terms of social fitness) than Ti/Fi (not that this is true in every case).

Examples?

 

[redacted]

Probably only because that's what you look for more often.

I've factored that into my understanding I hope, but how the hell can I defend myself against the confirmation bias argument anyway?

Now, given your history and admission to the belief in an I/E scale for separate functions, I can't really trust that you've got strong enough a grasp on the differences between, and thence can't really trust that you'd be able to accurately assess whether they're really pairing with their two dimensional opposite.

'Sides. Only takes one instance to disprove it. You four function people have to have a perfect score for it to even be plausible.
Maybe it is more common that Ti goes with Fe -- doesn't mean that people ought not to be analyzed as individuals, who break 'the rule'.

I said correlation dude.

 

[entropie]

From a thought model point of view, I couldnt imagine that a regular human being could lack any of the 8 functions. In some way of interpretation he should experience them all through the course of his life. Because his 4 functions (if there are 4) would be basically the same like the four shadows, yet grounded on different variations of appearance.

Therefore a tertiary or inferior function would make sense, given the premisse that a human being uses all of the 8 functions in his life.

----

From a more practical and life-oriented view, I can say that the third function is often strong in many people.

Be it my INFJ girlfriend wanting to fly a helicopter or experiencing the thrill of climbing a wall for no apparent reason.

Be it my father being a brutal enforcer of logic ISTP, wanting harmony for the herd and holding the family together, reacting to basic death-proof morales totally defieng his strong logic and opinion on things, when he hears the calling.

Be it me listening to a three hour conversation of totally random girls, just for sheer politeness, totally loosing my mind in the process, developing multiple serious headaches.

Be it my sister an ESFJ getting caught in my wake of ideas from time to time, suddenly deciding to be intrested in something completly new, even if she has not a single clue about the complexity of the new thing she discovered.

Be it my mom an ISFJ totally grounded in her feelings, morally a tradition roller, no high-risk taker and seemingly misunderstood, suddenly become attracted to one of my dumbest ideas, like buying a banana tree, laughing about my cruelest of jokes, though they disrespect any sort of tradition.

Be it my ISTJ buddy, who is a total strategist with no respect for any human life, except his own aquisition of wealth, needing every thursday evening his round of close friends, or else he will get depressed, masking it naturally through false pretense.

Be it my unholy *may the devil get her* ex-girl an ENFP, who never EVER ended on giving me lectures, how to organize my things better, while her own things were a mess from heaven to hell.

Ok, I guess that's it.

 

[Nocapszy]

Fair enough, correlation.

But what -- else of marketing -- good is a correlation in typology?


My favorite defense against a confirmation bias is to not be biased -- if you forget about which ideas you like you're bound to observe without discrimination.

 

[Jack Flak]

I haven't seen that. But who knows.

*stab stab stab* How's that. Not Fe, was it?

 

[Nocapszy]

I woulda shot the fuck.
More Ti.

 

[redacted]

Fair enough, correlation.

But what -- else of marketing -- good is a correlation in typology?


My favorite defense against a confirmation bias is to not be biased -- if you forget about which ideas you like you're bound to observe without discrimination.

It's true that a correlation (especially if it's not incredibly high) is not of extreme importance.

But I have noticed a bunch...for example, INTJs using Fi. It does sort of stick out at you. How many INTJs do you see using Fe more than Fi?

 

[Jack Flak]

It's true that a correlation (especially if it's not incredibly high) is not of extreme importance.

But I have noticed a bunch...for example, INTJs using Fi. It does sort of stick out at you. How many INTJs do you see using Fe more than Fi?

Uhhh.....All of 'em, I think.

 

[Nocapszy]

It's true that a correlation (especially if it's not incredibly high) is not of extreme importance.

But I have noticed a bunch...for example, INTJs using Fi. It does sort of stick out at you. How many INTJs do you see using Fe more than Fi?

I'll answer that question in a moment -- once we establish this:
What is the use of a correlation in a typology?
Perhaps I'm off my mark, but it was always my assumption that the aim of a typology is to enhance individual insight. The first two functions allow for us to reach that, because they're present enough to have a very strong bearing on behavior and personality.

Tertiary and Inferior on the other hand -- the rare birds; the ones happening along as the Primaries see fit -- don't make a legitimate impact on the insight, and studying a correlation (better named a confirmed bias, as you so aptly did) would inevitably encroach on observation: the very foundation of knowledge seeking.

 

[Jack Flak]

I'll answer that question in a moment -- once we establish this:
What is the use of a correlation in a typology?
Perhaps I'm off my mark, but it was always my assumption that the aim of a typology is to enhance individual insight. The first two functions allow for us to reach that, because they're present enough to have a very strong bearing on behavior and personality.

Tertiary and Inferior on the other hand -- the rare birds; the ones happening along as the Primaries see fit -- don't make a legitimate impact on the insight, and studying a correlation (better named a confirmed bias, as you so aptly did) would inevitably encroach on observation: the very foundation of knowledge seeking.

True dat.