# Thread: The pairings aren't pairings--Te/Fi, Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Si/Ne--they're identities

1. ## The pairings aren't pairings--Te/Fi, Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Si/Ne--they're identities

They're always paired in any given type. If Te is present in the top four, so is Fi. If Ti, then Fe. If Ne, then Si. And if Ni, then Se. (And vice versa on all of them.)

I wonder, do these pairings represent two functions together, or a person's exaggeration--her unbalancing of a balanced thing--via preference. That is, what if Te and Fi, or any of the other pairs, are not pairs, but instead they are exaggerations, distortions, extreme perspectives placed on things that, somehow, are the same thing?

What same thing? Dunno.

But why suggest the pairs might somehow be not pairs but somehow "the same thing"? Because I look around and it seems to me that inferior and tertiary, but particularly inferior, functions have an essential role in the life of the top two functions. Like, it seems that Ni really can't exist without Se. How could it? With no information coming in about what things look like moment to moment, how is there anything at all for Ni to sit back and process? Likewise, Ne and Si, if there is no library of at least some basic steadfast unchanging well known and detailed information, how is Ne to propose its wild possibilities? And maybe likewise Te+Fi and Ti+Fe, but I haven't thought how to make that seem plausible yet.

But so what this would suggest is that, once again, you don't mix and match functions. You get judgment and you get perception, and that's it. And for some reason, you're born wildly unbalanced in which aspect of judgment and which aspect of perception you prefer.

2. It's about acceptance and rejection. You choose your dominant orientation, and initially reject the other. Then you choose your dominant function, and its opposite is rejected to the opposite orientation. The auxiliary is also placed in the opposite orientation, and then its opposite, the tertiary ends up in the dominant orientation.
These four become the "ego-compatible" functions. The reverse of their orientations (dominant function with opposite orientation; dominant orientation with opposite function, etc) are then even more rejected by the ego, and become the shadows.
So yes, those pairings do work in tandem.

3. I've been thinking on this problem for sometime. It occures to me that such functions represent the same attitude, but opperating in two different spheres. I'll try to explain by looking at Ni-Se, as I understand them best.

It strikes me that both of these functions have an exploring, experimenting nature. Se causes the user to seek out new sensations and experiences in the physical world. It has a rather raw nature to it, as it opperates on just about the most basic physical level possible.

Ni users seek out new concepts and view points, twisting them back and forth. It too is raw, as the thoughts it provides are often wordless and half formed. Going from one function to another is a shift in focus, but not attitude. An INTJ (or INFJ) explores the physical world in the same manor as they do the inner one, just with less skill.

I think similar statements could be made regarding the other sets. I feel I understand Te-Fi (both utilising/analytical), but [I'm struggling rather more with Fe-Ti and Si-Ne. Most likely that's because I don't use them. All thoughts welcome.

4. Pretty much - Socionics touches on this, but MBTI does not.

Originally Posted by Socionics
On the Fe-Ti and Fi-Te divide

So, everyone is "subjective" at one level regarding external information. However, in different ways.

One imperfect way of putting it is this:

Fi-Te: "liking or disliking" (ie being "subective" with regards to) a kind of source of input, "source" also being "individuals"
Fe-Ti: "liking or dislikng" a kind of input

Te: takes any input "as it is given" as long as it is from a reliable source (or person)
Fi: tells you which sources are reliable (or which people to trust)

Fi is here the filter.

Fe: takes the input not "as it is given" but "reading between the lines"
Ti: organizes such input logically, rejecting the bits that do not fit logically.

Ti is here the filter.

In both cases, Fe and Te get the external, dynamic, input - they are the "antennae" - and Fi and Ti select what is "correct" according to "static" criteria of how things, or people, connect - they are the "filters".
That's just a short excerpt from a forums.

5. Originally Posted by Tyrant
Pretty much - Socionics touches on this, but MBTI does not.

That's just a short excerpt from a forums.
I take it those are scionic functions, which I gather are a little different to MBTI functions. My knowledge of socionics is limited.

6. OK, Ti-Fe:

One is like getting in tune with the way the world works, regardless of our feelings; you understand that everything is just a big bundle of individual variables bouncing off each other. The other takes the complete opposite perspective, and focuses on the feelings of others regardless of how things "really" are. It's the difference between "you look good in that dress" and "it makes you look fat."

OK, Si and Ne:

Si is a bit like navigating with a map that's been carved into your own body; you know what works for you and what doesn't work for you, you can feel it in your skin. This greates a natural distrust/skepticism of anything you're not familiar with. Ne is the complete opposite, and is all about following wild imaginative tangents wherever they go. It's the difference between "The taste of parsley makes me nauseous" and "let's feed the parsley to the cat!".

7. Ack! Circular reasoning! I observed that the pairings (Fe+Ti, Te+Fi, Se+Ni, Si+Ne) are always found together, and went on to say something about what this must mean. But they're not always "found" together. They are all posited together, making the 16 types.

So, are they always found together in fact? The socionics discussion mentioned and the concepts of acceptance and rejection sound good, and they all in fact play out that way in real people?

Not sure what I'm aiming for here, sounds a little like trying to reduce the 8 functions to three basic concepts, judgment, perception, and preference. And I guess that makes preference a hideously complex device, and still doesn't really illuminate its inner workings.

Dang! Preference, what *is* it!?!

8. Originally Posted by Tyrant
Pretty much - Socionics touches on this, but MBTI does not.
That's in a forum post... and I haven't seen it written anywhere else in socionics literature. So it's basically the same thing... since we elaborate on the MBTI's functions (it's not really MBTI, we're just using the jungian functions that MBTI follows at this point) just like the socionics people elaborate on their functions.

9. As for what those functions represent, I'd say that Te/Fi, Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, and Si/Ne are the same process, but operating at very different wavelengths. Opposite ends of the same spectrum.

10. Originally Posted by Kalach
Like, it seems that Ni really can't exist without Se. How could it? With no information coming in about what things look like moment to moment, how is there anything at all for Ni to sit back and process?

MBTI is but one theory about functions. That doesn't mean it's correct.
Check out this little description of the Singer-Loomis Inventory.
The last sentence is most relevant to your post.

The Singer-Loomis Inventory of Personality

The 8 psychological types are viewed as independent cognitive modes, and the test attempts to measure their relative development in the individual.
Since one type of development is not assumed to exclude another, the manual describes people with, for example, both introverted intuition and extraverted sensation highly developed.

It is only those most brainwashed by MBTI who fail to see it's possible to have both Ni+Se highly developed.
As a matter of fact, according to some, the inferior function can be utilized so much that it is actually mistaken for the person's dominant function.

#### Posting Permissions

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