User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 33

  1. #11
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    Well, I would say that the first few parts sound like more like Fi to me, but I think we need an INFP to tell us more. I think that last one might be more related to inferior Se under stress, though.
    I'm probably much weaker on functional analysis than many here. But that never stops me from giving my opinion.

    I tend to think that the Dominant and Auxiliary functions are the main players, and the rest are all kind of a haze that are at various stages of development or non-development. The Tertiary function in particular comes out and becomes a big player at times of stress or conflict; for example the Joe Butts definitions of tertiary Ti and Fi that are cited in ?'s post strike me as use of Ti and Fi under stress and conflict. But otherwise, the unstressed use of the Tertiary function remains as hazy and negligible as the other lower functions. Thus I would class the Tertiary function as just one more of the generally hazy non-playing functions (on a daily unstressed basis).

    As a result, I tend to think that all our normal, unstressed reactions to things come largely from our Dominant and Auxiliary functions. Input from lower-level functions comes largely in the form of good habits we've developed (for example, cultivating habits of Fe social politeness) or specific talents we've developed (for example, deliberately developed Si data-gathering skills).

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    I have always been a little confused between Ti and Fi behavior in some circumstances.

    For example, what you describe is something I feel too -- but to me it tends to be intellectualized. I see it merely as a matter of consistency and logic, that things have to be uniform and coherent... including my character. I remember when I was a teenager and just thought Fe stuff was completely stupid, even though I did not want to stir up trouble; to me, it was inconsistent to show one thing but believe another inside, and I hated it.

    So it seems to me that either Fi is much broader in scope, or that Ti can mimic Fi, just in more impersonal ways. But how can I compare my subjective internal experience to yours, and thus determine that yours was more personal/Fi and mine was more impersonal/Ti? I don't know the answer to that.

    In this case, I would say that all people have a visceral reaction to the contrast between sincerity and insincerity, the same way that all people have a visceral reaction to the contrast between love and hate or the contrast between acceptance and rejection. Those things get drilled into us in early childhood as part of routine socialization, probably even before most of the individual MBTI functions develop. The only difference is how the individual chooses to express that reaction as adults. For example, an INFP will react to insincerity via Fi, while the INTP will react to insincerity via Ti. That is, presumably the underlying visceral reaction is the same in both cases, but the INFP will choose to express his reaction in emotional terms whereas the INTP disregards the emotional channel and evaluates and expresses via an intellectual channel.

    INxJs might be a slightly different case. The dominant function for INTPs and INFPs is a Judging function, whereas the dominant function for INxJs is a Perceiving function (Ni). If INxJs have a strong reaction to insincerity on the level of a "Judgment," then it may indicate that they are reacting to the insincerity via their Auxiliary (Judging) function (Fe in INFJs and Te in INTJs). For example, in their dealings with other people, if they spot insincerity in another person they react with an instant dislike for that person. (Meanwhile their Perceiving Ni might see insincerity as just a factor to be evaluated in internal evaluations.) But that is speculation on my part, since I'm not an INxJ.

    Getting back to the Tertiary function: I would write off the Tertiary function as a contributor to feelings about insincerity (except under conditions of conflict and stress). I don't think people need to go searching out Fi in oneself in the lower functions in order to dislike insincerity. All of us, regardless of type, seem to be able to recognize right vs. wrong and even react strongly to it, as a result of basic socialization when we are growing up. IMO, our functions don't have anything to do with recognizing right vs. wrong; instead, they only reflect how we react to right vs. wrong. And a good interaction between the Dominant and Auxiliary functions will give us all the tools we need for that. IOW, there's no particular reason to delve past our Dominant and Auxiliary functions except where specific skills are demanded by the environment or we desire to develop those skills ourselves.

    To expand on that last point: For most cases, it seems to me that a good interaction between the Dominant and Auxiliary functions will 1) give all of us adequate doorways to both the inner and outer worlds; 2) give all of us both a Judging function and a Perceiving function with which to carry out the full cycle of evaluation and decision; 3) and as a result, give all of us a couple different ways (J and P) to react to and express the internalized, universal evaluations of right and wrong that were drilled into us as a result of basic socialization when we are growing up. After all that, skills coming from the lower functions are just icing on the cake--they are supplementary tools that we can develop or not, depending on our environment and personal needs.

    Don't ask me to prove all this; I can't. I'm just kind of throwing this out as anecdotal experience. (Athenian200 asked for INFP input on Fi, and I got thinking about it.) This is just my own evaluation of how I myself use my Dominant and Auxiliary functions, as opposed to how I've developed individual skills from my lower functions. And my Tertiary function (Si in INFPs) seems to fall in with the lower functions, in that the unstressed use of the Tertiary function is simply one more skill to be developed, and then turned on and off as needed. (In practice, I certainly don't see Si data-gathering as part of my natural, visceral reaction to anything except stress and conflict.)

  2. #12
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    FineLine: That was an interesting generalized view about the functional positions, and I thank you for being so detailed. But you didn't describe how you experience Fi, and I think that might be particularly helpful. We're analyzing things against a particular idea/theory here for the sake of discussion, and while it may or may not be right, we want the input regardless so we can each see if the correlation makes sense to us, and decide for ourselves if there's a connection or not.

  3. #13
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    I was just thinking of these two posts, and they started me thinking about INxJ tertiary functions, and how they typically manifest. I think that due to the dominant Ni, they might manifest slightly more than in other types (although this may actually be applicable to any type with a dominant perceiving function). While I think I understand how Fi manifests in INTJ's and will attempt to describe it here, I want to hear some outside opinions.
    I was too busy to respond to this initially, but I have not read some basic principles that may need to be considered first. I think that we can agree that all eight functions are used within each type, not just four as some claim. Secondly, does this entire dialogue not depend on whose function theory you prescribe to? Lenore Thomson says that the weakest and next to weakest functions cannot be developed, therefore a futile gesture. However, tertiary in itself means third place. So, one’s tertiary should be easily developed, since it will be ahead of five other functions.

    The question remains, whose theory you prescribe to. For INFJ for example, Lenore Thomson believes the function order goes something like this Ni-Fe-Si-Te-Fi-Ne-Ti-Se. Thus, the teritiary function would be introverted sensing (Si) and the weakest function Se. Ti would be next to the weakest function, therefore almost non-existent. However since Ni and Ti are almost identical in usage, Ni would not be that important. Similarly, since Se and Te are very closely related in usage, then Se would not be as important for the INFJ type. On the other hand, John Beebe says that the order for INFJ is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se-Ne-Fi-Te-Si, putting Ti in third as teritiary and having Te and Si as almost non-existent. Since Jung says that the weakest function will be the opposite of the dominant, two arguments can be made for either side. Jung either meant literally opposite in both function and attitude or he may have referred to the fact that it’s opposite in function, however since you cannot extravert or introvert two functions simultaneously, the true opposite will be of the same attitude.

    In the end, is the actual teritiary function the third function, as defined or is it the next to last type function. Either way for the INFJ, the teritiary may be Si or Ti based on that assumption , or Te/Ti based on it being next to last.

  4. #14
    Protocol Droid Athenian200's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    4w5
    Posts
    8,828

    Default

    Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say Beebe's theory. And we are also assuming that all types have all functions, but that only four are normally being used consciously, while the other four are usually used by the unconscious to supplement (but may with development be used in a limited way consciously, or else be compensated for by the other conscious functions).

    In my case, for instance, I know I have Fe, but I might not have Fi directly. I mostly determine my emotional state via external rules and ideas. I may have Fi unconsciously, but I think I have to rely on input from my Ni insights, Ti analysis, and reflected Fe to determine what it is. In other words, I sort of have to use other people as emotional "mirrors" to see my own emotions. I can even infer my current state by noticing trends in how I perceive other's emotions. If my initial perceptions of them seems to be skewed more one way than it was at a previous time in a similar situation, I know the difference is my own feelings being reflected back. My stronger awareness is of what other people should be feeling in a given situation, based on certain rules and ideas, however. So my feeling is directed outward, but it's easily reflected back and analyzed.

  5. #15
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Hi, Fineline... I didn't even know you were here, until your "driveby posting."

    Clarifying something about Si -- which is that it seems more to be the internalized stable "inner map" that can be used to provide clarity when the outer world of data becomes too confusing to deal with.

    So for INxP, it seems that the stress point would drive us back away from the chaos of Ne perception to the inner picture that we've developed over a lifetime of what the world supposedly is like, what our priorities are, what gives us focus and lets us ignore enough of the outer stimulation in order to cope.

    Si as a Tertiary would seem to be the entrenched point where we just throw our hands in the air, dig in, and say, "I am not moving from this stance" whether or not it is completely sensible or matches with all of the Ne patterns/data floating around or is even logical (Ti/Fi) per se.

    Used maturely, it would seem to be more of an "anchor" point where we can retreat during times of unavoidable chaos, where we find ourselves questioning everything and just need to get a focus on things.

    So mature Si allows itself to be examined and updated, even while providing an anchor; immature Si is just thrown up as a defensive shield, to keep out input we do not personally like or don't want to deal with, and is calcified.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #16
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    FineLine: That was an interesting generalized view about the functional positions, and I thank you for being so detailed. But you didn't describe how you experience Fi, and I think that might be particularly helpful. We're analyzing things against a particular idea/theory here for the sake of discussion, and while it may or may not be right, we want the input regardless so we can each see if the correlation makes sense to us, and decide for ourselves if there's a connection or not.
    Okey-doke.

    As a rule, Fi judgments are rooted deep. In a sense, I can practically remember back to when those moral imperatives were beaten or guilted into me as a child, and they still retain the sense or the power of being imposed from an indisputable source of rightness (an angry parent, teachers, etc.). As such, it's easy to dig in my heels when acting on them, because they feel so incontrovertible that it seems like their rightness should be recognized by the rest of the world as well, as soon as I point them out.

    On the other hand, I'm older now and I've learned to trust my Fi judgments as far as I can throw them. Especially in society, Fe rules seem to hold more sway. Also, Fi judgments are largely just morals, and morals depend on the context and the environment. (When in Rome...).

    So my Fi has been ground down and sanded down to the point that I'm honestly not all that bothered by insincerity (talking behind people's backs) when I encounter it. As sins go, it's a fairly negligible one. Basically, I've learned not to judge other people. I still judge myself in some ways. But other people--not so much anymore. (And not even myself all that much these days. )

    That's actually normal progress for an INFP. As we grow up, we learn that the world doesn't operate by our rules and we increasingly cease to judge the world and instead apply our Fi only to ourselves and our own actions. Later in life, to the extent that we increasingly recognize ourselves as part of the world, we don't even apply our judgments to ourselves.

    In other words, Fi is something of a moving target in INFPs.

    So if you want a "purer" version of how Fi reacts to insincerity, you should probably hear from a younger INFP or ISFP. As I get older, Fi isn't such a strong influence in my life. I accept input from my Fi, but always with a truckload of salt. As a corrective to what I see as a frequently faulty Fi, I try to find other prisms (functions) within myself through which to see things, in order to find more ways to evaluate and judge.

  7. #17
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FineLine View Post
    ...Later in life, to the extent that we increasingly recognize ourselves as part of the world, we don't even apply our judgments to ourselves.
    So how does Fi actually act in an older INFP type, specifically? What tangible purpose does it serve; how is it recognized? (I'm all a-curious now. )
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  8. #18
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Hi, Fineline... I didn't even know you were here, until your "driveby posting."

    Clarifying something about Si -- which is that it seems more to be the internalized stable "inner map" that can be used to provide clarity when the outer world of data becomes too confusing to deal with.

    So for INxP, it seems that the stress point would drive us back away from the chaos of Ne perception to the inner picture that we've developed over a lifetime of what the world supposedly is like, what our priorities are, what gives us focus and lets us ignore enough of the outer stimulation in order to cope.

    Si as a Tertiary would seem to be the entrenched point where we just throw our hands in the air, dig in, and say, "I am not moving from this stance" whether or not it is completely sensible or matches with all of the Ne patterns/data floating around or is even logical (Ti/Fi) per se.

    Used maturely, it would seem to be more of an "anchor" point where we can retreat during times of unavoidable chaos, where we find ourselves questioning everything and just need to get a focus on things.

    So mature Si allows itself to be examined and updated, even while providing an anchor; immature Si is just thrown up as a defensive shield, to keep out input we do not personally like or don't want to deal with, and is calcified.
    Fair enough. That's much more comprehensive than mere "data-gathering" as I described it. Nonetheless, I would still perceive Si as something I do under stress and not much at all in unstressed conditions.

    Here's the full definition of unstressed Si from CognitiveProcesses.com:

    Introverted Sensing often involves storing data and information, then comparing and contrasting the current situation with similar ones. The immediate experience or words are instantly linked with the prior experiences, and we register a similarity or a difference--for example, noticing that some food doesn't taste the same or is saltier than it usually is. Introverted Sensing is also operating when we see someone who reminds us of someone else. Sometimes a feeling associated with the recalled image comes into our awareness along with the information itself. Then the image can be so strong, our body responds as if reliving the experience. The process also involves reviewing the past to draw on the lessons of history, hindsight, and experience. With introverted Sensing, there is often great attention to detail and getting a clear picture of goals and objectives and what is to happen. There can be a oneness with ageless customs that help sustain civilization and culture and protect what is known and long-lasting, even while what is reliable changes.
    As an unstressed function, I can recognize some parts of it. To the extent that Si involves comparisons with the past, Fi also spends a lot of time in the past. But as a rule, Fi tends to extract emotional data rather than sensory data. Fi is fairly oblivious to sensory data, so I don't have a big past store of sensory data from the past to delve into.

    I don't even remember facts, faces, etc. very well at all. INFPs traditionally seem to have a diffuse, global memory rather than detail-oriented one. As a result, I develop lots of research, organizational, and storage tools to support me at work rather than bother trying to remember facts and numbers myself. I've learned not to trust my memory for anything. I even forget my own phone number on a regular basis, even though I call it daily to talk to my wife. [Edit:] And I always dial. I never program anything into speed-dial, because that way I'll forget it permanently and won't know it when I use a strange phone.

    As for deliberately trying to develop a good unstressed Si, I've played around with paying more attention to sensory data in the present and then trying to remember it by placing myself in the past in a sensory way. But it's tough. It sure doesn't come natural.

    At least, that's my quick evaluation of it.

  9. #19
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by athenian200 View Post
    Okay, for the sake of argument, let's say Beebe's theory. And we are also assuming that all types have all functions, but that only four are normally being used consciously, while the other four are usually used by the unconscious to supplement (but may with development be used in a limited way consciously, or else be compensated for by the other conscious functions).
    I have always sided with Thomson's theory, but Beebe's does make more sense in it's application, for all of the reasons that you list. This is how I see them in myself as an ISTP:
    1. Ti - Analyzing; categorizing; evaluating according to principles and whether something fits the framework or model; figuring out the principles on which something works; checking for inconsistencies; clarifying definitions to get more precision. Analyzing your options using principles like comfort or or “Red is a power color.”
    2. Se - Experiencing the immediate context; taking action in the physical world; noticing changes and opportunities for action; accumulating experiences; scanning for visible reactions and relevant data; recognizing “what is.” Noticing what was available, trying on different items, and seeing how they look.
    3. Ni - Foreseeing implications and likely effects without external data; realizing “what will be”; conceptualizing new ways of seeing things; envisioning transformations; getting an image of profound meaning or far-reaching symbols. Envisioning yourself in an outfit or maybe envisioning yourself being a certain way.
    4. Fe - Connecting; considering others and the group—organizing to meet their needs and honor their values and feelings; maintaining societal, organizational, or group values; adjusting to and accommodating others; deciding if something is appropriate or acceptable to others. Considering what would be appropriate for the situation: “One should or shouldn’t wear…” or “People will think…”

    Little or no use:

    Te - Segmenting; organizing for efficiency; systematizing; applying logic; structuring; checking for consequences; monitoring for standards or specifications being met; setting boundaries, guidelines, and parameters; deciding if something is working or not. Sorting out different colors and styles; thinking about the consequences, as in “Since I have to stand all day…”

    Si - Reviewing past experiences; “what is” evoking “what was”; seeking detailed information and links to what is known; recalling stored impressions; accumulating data; recognizing the way things have always been. Remembering the last time you wore a particular item or the last time you were at a similar event—maybe even remembering how you felt then.

    Ne - Interpreting situations and relationships; picking up meanings and interconnections; being drawn to change “what is” for “what could possibly be”; noticing what is not said and threads of meaning emerging across multiple contexts. Noticing the possible meanings of what you might wear: “Wearing this might communicate…”

    Fi - Valuing; considering importance and worth; reviewing for incongruity; evaluating something based on the truths on which it is based; clarifying values to achieve accord; deciding if something is of significance and worth standing up for. Evaluating whether you like an outfit or not: “This outfit suits me and feels right.”

  10. #20
    RDF
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    So how does Fi actually act in an older INFP type, specifically? What tangible purpose does it serve; how is it recognized? (I'm all a-curious now. )


    I still get input from Fi. But like I say, I don't particularly trust it.

    In general:

    Let's take the case where I see an iNtuitive disparaging Sensors; my Fi may tell me that he is being mean to Sensors, but I won't take action on that alone. I'll do a back-up check by researching what the professional MBTI community says about using type to disparage people. If my Fi coincides with what the MBTI scientific community says, then and only then I'll feel that I can indulge a little Fi crusading.

    Personally:

    At my time in life, one particularly prominent aspect of dealing with Fi on a personal basis is the game of coming up with ways to avoid guilt. Like I said, I still get input from Fi, largely in the form of feeling guilty about things: Am I "green" enough? Should I be worried about global warming/politics/the homeless, etc.? Can I take short-cuts at work, or do I always have to deliver 110 percent? What happens when I get caught between obligations to bosses and subordinates at work? Should I feel bad about being gruff toward a cashier in a store? Should I stop for the fellow on the road with a flat tire? And so on.)

    But I'm a pretty busy fellow, and I don't have time to live like a saint. So I work through the guilt in various ways (depending on the nature of the activity and the nature of the guilt). I tell myself there are other (external) ways to measure behavior--what's legal vs. illegal, when in Rome make like a Roman, [Edit:] using established, impersonal administrative procedures to deal with issues in the workplace rather than crusading on the basis of personal sentiment about the parties involved, etc. Frankly, I treat a lot of the signals coming up from Fi as static and white noise. I find that if I ignore the signals long enough on a particular issue, they go away after a while.

    That's not the entirety of how Fi affects me personally, but it's a good example of what I meant by ducking the judgments coming from Fi.

    [Edit:] To me, it's just a question of shifting priorities. A similar case might be where an INTP spends the first part of his life devoted to work and intellectual pursuits. But at a later stage of life, he may start questioning his priorities and begin putting more time into family and social pursuits, deliberately tuning out a natural inclination to retire to the study and play with numbers in his free time. I don't know if that's a direct parallel, but sometimes we make big life changes and deliberately choose to tune out the signals we thought so important earlier in life.

Similar Threads

  1. How would you describe the balance of your auxiliary and tertiary functions?
    By Smilephantomhive in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 06-23-2016, 10:40 AM
  2. Effects of psychedelics on personality function usage.
    By daftpunkfunk in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-23-2011, 02:55 AM
  3. Effects of Type Consciousness
    By s0532 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 03-28-2011, 03:46 PM
  4. [MBTItm] Series #2: The effect of parenting on you.
    By gretch in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 01-02-2009, 11:39 AM
  5. effect of sex hormones on type
    By Recluse in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 09-13-2007, 08:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO