Holy crap!--the orientation of the tertiary?!

[Kalach]

Jeesuz is right. Did you ever think you are not 'mimicing' anything and that you are really using Ne? Why do you guys try to twist everything up to fit function theories instead of accepting the obvious?

Coz it's not obvious. If the eight function model a la Berens et al is right, then Ne would exist for me, but in fifth place, and would, following that model, require a much higher expenditure of energy to "do"--and that seems to me to match my experience. I can and have had in-the-moment AHA! experiences, but it feels a poopload more like drawing on stuff I already know than in making new connections per se. Plus, it doesn't happen very often at all, is exhausting to pursue, and frankly, if I'm extraverting perception at all, it totally just is much easier to physically stare than to intuit, and that would be Se. If being dom Ni meant relative ease with intuition in the opposite orientation, wouldn't Ne be easier than Se? It doesn't seem to me to be. Preferred function orientation does seem to be a meaningful restriction on what exists in the person. (Sample size: 1.)

It seems obvious that one gains satisfaction and some kind of adaptive advantage by specialising ones cognitive operation, so I guess it's possible not that I don't have Ne, but that I avoid it so that Ni gets better play.

Is that an adaptive, relatively conscious choice that dictates what is possible or is it an indication of what actually is possible independent of personal will?

 

[jenocyde]

How come this thread is getting all the responses, while my poor little thread which addresses a similar issue is left alone, neglected, and forlorn in the dark ?

It's because the OP here is a regular, right? Darn you, board politics! I shake my fist at you, although my fist isn't exactly the most threatening-looking fist. My hands are a pianist's hands.

I have no idea why one thread does better than another. Honestly, I click "new posts" at the top of the page and just respond to the most recent one.

But I see your fist shake and raise you one booty shake.

 

[Kalach]

And another thing, something good from the Manual...

There's research into whole of type vs isolated function stuff suggesting that functions other than the dominant are NOT THE SAME as the same function when it's dominant. The research seems a bit wrong-headed inasmuch as they do things like take an INTJ and ENTJ and have naive observers say what they see in them, and they find big enough differences in the observations that the researchers decided to say means dominant Ni and auxiliary Ni are different beasts. A bit wrong-headed in that it seems like there would be a lot of "noise" in the data that wasn't specifically differences in dom and aux, but was other functions being observed instead. But be that as it may...

Jung, in describing the functions, acknowledged somewhere briefly, that he was describing mythical people, persons who had full, free and complete use of a dominant function and were using nothing else!

Which is to say... SOMETHING, I DON"T KNOW WHAT! Something like, by the time one gets as far into the psyche as the tertiary function, we're not looking at something quite the same as that function when it's dominant. Or are we?

 

[Jaguar]

Why do you guys try to twist everything up to fit function theories instead of accepting the obvious?

Some have no vision, despite testing 20/20 on their last eye exam.

 

[edcoaching]

When I think about how ESFJs and ENFJs can "work a room" I'll agree that my use of Fe looks nothing like theirs. But there are lots of INFJs and INTJs who don't use Ni as well as I do, and lots who use it better.

That doesn't discount the theory. Proof for the theory comes from USING it and seeing it have a positive impact in whatever application you're using it in.

I think it's actually comforting that type isn't like a rats-in-a-maze or Pavlovian response sort of thing. Type is innate; how we express type is affected by all of the other factors like family, culture, education, trauma...

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Coz it's not obvious. If the eight function model a la Berens et al is right, then Ne would exist for me, but in fifth place, and would, following that model, require a much higher expenditure of energy to "do"--and that seems to me to match my experience. I can and have had in-the-moment AHA! experiences, but it feels a poopload more like drawing on stuff I already know than in making new connections per se. Plus, it doesn't happen very often at all, is exhausting to pursue, and frankly, if I'm extraverting perception at all, it totally just is much easier to physically stare than to intuit, and that would be Se.

I'm not questionning your type, but you are describing Si more than Ni. Ni IS 'aha' moments. Si is not. Running subjective scans on objective data from the external world into your internal world is Si. It's time consuming like Ni, but regards memory experience more than new imagining. Ni does see possibilities, but explores the one 'right' one.

If being dom Ni meant relative ease with intuition in the opposite orientation, wouldn't Ne be easier than Se? It doesn't seem to me to be. Preferred function orientation does seem to be a meaningful restriction on what exists in the person. (Sample size: 1.)

It seems obvious that one gains satisfaction and some kind of adaptive advantage by specialising ones cognitive operation,

I think you are just regurgitating function theory stuff here. We really have no idea how the mind uses functions, or if it has difficulty using them. The whole 'stress' theory is interesting, but who knows how we use functions.

so I guess it's possible not that I don't have Ne, but that I avoid it so that Ni gets better play.

Is that an adaptive, relatively conscious choice that dictates what is possible or is it an indication of what actually is possible independent of personal will?

I personally don't believe it's conscious at all. The mind works too fast, and processes too much information to need to consciously use functions, much less choose them.

Well, I wonder if you're not more N/S than N/N (this is my own lingo, feel free to ignore it). I will list the traits of Si (according to my hartzler book):

• I am aware of what is going on in my body, including my emo state
• I collect detailed info, react to it, and store my internal reactions along with the info
• I can vividly recall previous experiences, as well as internal reactions tied to the memories
• I store and retrieve detailed info in the sequence in which it happened
• I compare current experience against stored past impressions and experiences
• I feel more comfortable when processes are repeatable
• I am comfortable with and attempt to maintain traditions
• I attempt to do tasks as efficiently as possible, thus conserving energy.

And Se:

• I notice, directly experience, and trust data provided by my five senses; seeing, hearing, feeling, smelling, and tasting
• I continuously scan the external world using my five senses for data
• I have the ability to discriminate small differences between objects as I experience them
• My attention tends to be on the present moment and current experience rather than the past or future
• I focus on the context of the present situation
• I seek sensory stim from the outer world
• I recognize that the real world is exactly what it appears to be
• When involved in a sport, I am able to "be the ball"

And, finally Ne:

• I scan the external world picking up patterns, connections, and interrelationships between people, objects, and events
• I notice missing parts or steps in patterns
• External events trigger my awareness of potential, alternatives, or patterns that then provide me with the basis for change
• I see ways to change incongruous patterns, connections, and interrelationships
• I take existing ideas and link them together in new and intersting ways
• I generate usable possiblities for change in the external world
• I constantly am looking for ways to change things to make them 'better' and have little energy for maintaining things as they are
• I usually find something positive to see in situations

I'd be interested to hear if any of these resonate with you........

 

[Venom]

Myers did a ton of research (now in Step III) that gets at the development of the preferences and spent many more years on the theory than Jung did. Based on that research, she was predicting with 90% accuracy who would/wouldn't finish college; who would die shortly after med school and all kinds of other things--based on whether people showed signs of actually being able to use their preferences (having a preference isn't the same as having conscious, mature control of it, if you haven't noticed!!!)

Could you maybe lead me to some more info on this stuff???

 

[edcoaching]

You can see a sample report at MBTI

And, here's a blog from someone who went through the training and takes time to explain it. MBTI Step III | Ann Holm

Most of my info comes from conference presentations by one of the developers and there's nothing in writing...

 

[Kalach]

I'm not questionning your type, but you are describing Si more than Ni. Ni IS 'aha' moments. Si is not.

AHA! moments that are directly generated in interaction with the outside world aren't Ni. AHA!'z appearing during reflection on inner images would be.

I think you are just regurgitating function theory stuff here. We really have no idea how the mind uses functions, or if it has difficulty using them. The whole 'stress' theory is interesting, but who knows how we use functions.

Thus the questions and one man's experience as a frame of reference. That the later questions are included means the experience is being opened up for interpretation. To eventually one day find the answer to how we use the functions.

I personally don't believe it's conscious at all. The mind works too fast, and processes too much information to need to consciously use functions, much less choose them.

"Choose" is meant to have a deeper meaning here than daily decision-making. More like, "orient" or "create", with respect to things like personality. As in statements like: "I enjoy Ni, so I *choose* to spend more time with it than with developing extraverted versions of intuition, and my choice is partly my own, partly whatever promoted intuition in my psyche in the first place."

Meaning: what is the level of choice? Is there any? What is consciousness anyway?

And so on.

 

[Eric B]

Lenore Thomson has suggested that it's the Puer complex that orients the tertiary into the dominant attitude. That's the "Tertiary Temptation". Think of an ego and four neutral functions. The ego chooses its preferred orientation, and dominant function, which is used in that orientation. The other functions and opposite orientation are initially rejected. Hence, all three being associated with the opposite orientation. But as the differentiate, the aux. and inferior continue to pull the ego to the opposite orientation, while the tertiary becomes associated with a "puer" (child) complex that resists by maintaining the dominant attitude. Hence, the alternating attitudes.

 

[fireandwater]

And most leave out the mounting evidence that the opposite orientation of the dominant function may actually develop in tandem with the dominant (like, Ne and Ni kinda together) although the dominant remains, well, dominant!!

Interesting. That's what I've thought for awhile is more the case for me: NeNiFi in some order or other which varies from day to day/year to year, etc.

 

[edcoaching]

Lenore Thomson has suggested that it's the Puer complex that orients the tertiary into the dominant attitude. That's the "Tertiary Temptation". Think of an ego and four neutral functions. The ego chooses its preferred orientation, and dominant function, which is used in that orientation. The other functions and opposite orientation are initially rejected. Hence, all three being associated with the opposite orientation. But as the differentiate, the aux. and inferior continue to pull the ego to the opposite orientation, while the tertiary becomes associated with a "puer" (child) complex that resists by maintaining the dominant attitude. Hence, the alternating attitudes.

That's one theory. The other is that the pull of the dominant is so strong that when one is in its attitude it takes over. Hence functions 2-4 in the opposite attitude.

But there's a bigger idea here. Many, many people (dare we think most???) NEVER even develop their first two functions. How many people do you know who never quite manage to adequately perceive enough information and then use a rational process for making a decision, with enough reflection AND input from the external world? That's what a mature person looks like, and that's only developing the first two functions!!!

All the theorists agree that for the vast majority of people, work on the rest of the functions begins somewhere at midlife. Yes, trauma or education or other things can force use of the other functions in ways that help develop them, but this is not the norm.

So...don't get offended if you're under 30...or 25 or whatever, for you may be one of the few whose pathways have led to development. But for those of us old enough to supposedly have had the chance to start developing, the difficulty of using those functions becomes even more evident because of the many life experiences we've had that would have benefited from having conscious control over them!!!

I'm very clear now that I do Te better than Ti and that it is a far more effective place of rest for the dominant. I can find in the over-50 crowd of type experts those whose tertiary has developed in the same attitude. And with good evidence. Why would we think that a theory that explains basic differences in humans would go on to encompass an immovable, innate path to development? The nature vs. nurture debate gets more clear all the time from many fields of research--there's an innate nature that is influenced by nurture. It is both/and, not either/or.

So for myself...all I have to do is look at the effects of using Ti. To write journal articles, organizing my thoughts logically, developing models or patterns that prove or disprove my thesis, takes advice from others, tight matrices, and chocolate and caffeine. Further, there is no fun whatsoever in activities that tend to amuse others who use Ti, such as Sudoku (which I will only do in partnership with my ENTJ daughter if she wants to), solving mysteries, critically analyzing theories, etc. Te, though...it's actually fairly easy now for me to rethink external systems and structures, getting them to work more efficiently--or to build one from scratch for an organization. Ooooh, am I really INTJ? NO because the Te is always in service to Fe--what will make things better for the people involved.

Yes, case study of one--my point is that I could poll my aging colleagues and probably find equal numbers on both sides of the tertiary question. But since we're all "mature" we discuss it with curiosity and openness.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

That's one theory. The other is that the pull of the dominant is so strong that when one is in its attitude it takes over. Hence functions 2-4 in the opposite attitude.

But there's a bigger idea here. Many, many people (dare we think most???) NEVER even develop their first two functions. How many people do you know who never quite manage to adequately perceive enough information and then use a rational process for making a decision, with enough reflection AND input from the external world? That's what a mature person looks like, and that's only developing the first two functions!!!

All the theorists agree that for the vast majority of people, work on the rest of the functions begins somewhere at midlife. Yes, trauma or education or other things can force use of the other functions in ways that help develop them, but this is not the norm.

So...don't get offended if you're under 30...or 25 or whatever, for you may be one of the few whose pathways have led to development. But for those of us old enough to supposedly have had the chance to start developing, the difficulty of using those functions becomes even more evident because of the many life experiences we've had that would have benefited from having conscious control over them!!!

I'm very clear now that I do Te better than Ti and that it is a far more effective place of rest for the dominant. I can find in the over-50 crowd of type experts those whose tertiary has developed in the same attitude. And with good evidence. Why would we think that a theory that explains basic differences in humans would go on to encompass an immovable, innate path to development? The nature vs. nurture debate gets more clear all the time from many fields of research--there's an innate nature that is influenced by nurture. It is both/and, not either/or.

So for myself...all I have to do is look at the effects of using Ti. To write journal articles, organizing my thoughts logically, developing models or patterns that prove or disprove my thesis, takes advice from others, tight matrices, and chocolate and caffeine. Further, there is no fun whatsoever in activities that tend to amuse others who use Ti, such as Sudoku (which I will only do in partnership with my ENTJ daughter if she wants to), solving mysteries, critically analyzing theories, etc. Te, though...it's actually fairly easy now for me to rethink external systems and structures, getting them to work more efficiently--or to build one from scratch for an organization. Ooooh, am I really INTJ? NO because the Te is always in service to Fe--what will make things better for the people involved.

Yes, case study of one--my point is that I could poll my aging colleagues and probably find equal numbers on both sides of the tertiary question. But since we're all "mature" we discuss it with curiosity and openness.

I'm leaning more toward lots of nature, and a little bit of nurture. We get our preferences from our parents, and they must both be in us, even if we cannot see them. (I call them ninja functions) Along these lines regarding Te, I am amazed at how quickly one function can be enhanced or discarded, at least in myself. When i first discovered functions, I tested myself and got this rundown:

Ni>Fe>Te>Ne>Fi>Ti>Si>Se

Now that I know about Jung and his theory that the primary is in the attitude opposite the following three functions, I find it even more fascinating. But now that I've quit hanging out with friends and been using my Ti more, reading more, thinking about theories more, etc., my Ti has replaced my Te, although I can use Te well.

I think I disagree about not developing the primary and aux fairly well before the age of 20. I am not seeing that in my kids, but I homeschool. I'm even seeing their tert developing nicely! Perhaps there are some variables, like institutionalized education, along with life stressors, that keep people coming to full fruition with their primary and aux functions.

Thanks for your input. It was very timely.

 

[edcoaching]

Now that I know about Jung and his theory that the primary is in the attitude opposite the following three functions, I find it even more fascinating. But now that I've quit hanging out with friends and been using my Ti more, reading more, thinking about theories more, etc., my Ti has replaced my Te, although I can use Te well.

I love reading and thinking about theories but it's the ideas of what the possibilities are (like reforming math education throughout the world based on my research on S-N differences...) rather than the nuances of the theory.

I think I disagree about not developing the primary and aux fairly well before the age of 20. I am not seeing that in my kids, but I homeschool. I'm even seeing their tert developing nicely! Perhaps there are some variables, like institutionalized education, along with life stressors, that keep people coming to full fruition with their primary and aux functions.

Actually the very loose parameters are, if the environment supports the child (a rather big if, actually) then the dominant develops by the age of 8-12, meaning they have conscious control over it. You can use a function without mastering it but for example by 12 the Ni's who've been supported know how to use their hunches and insights, even though they probably started having them in the crib. The auxiliary develops during adolescence and most people can even pinpoint an "awakening." It's normal for E's to withdraw a bit in those years and actually develop the auxiliary in an obvious way via an activity that any type expert would recognize. And for I's to find some external arena (they're usually forced to through school anyway.) Then what happens depends on life--and again you can do activities that use functions without really having control over them.

As for whether most people have a dominant and auxiliary well-developed by young adulthood? Ask yourself how we define immaturity:

• "He/she just rushes to decisions, cutting off without enough information or the input of anyone else. If they'd just listen..."--that's lack fo development of a Perceiving function. OR,
• "He/she can't make up her mind about anything--keeps switching majors/can't settle on a career/flits from passion to passion"--that's lack of a judging function.

Or, go into any business and count the number of unbalanced decisions. There are plenty of people out there who have barely begun the journey of individuation...

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

As for whether most people have a dominant and auxiliary well-developed by young adulthood? Ask yourself how we define immaturity:

• "He/she just rushes to decisions, cutting off without enough information or the input of anyone else. If they'd just listen..."--that's lack fo development of a Perceiving function. OR,
• "He/she can't make up her mind about anything--keeps switching majors/can't settle on a career/flits from passion to passion"--that's lack of a judging function.

Or, go into any business and count the number of unbalanced decisions. There are plenty of people out there who have barely begun the journey of individuation...

Oh, I'm sure you are right about 'most people' because I feel most people in our society anymore are not nurtured enough in the right way; live too much of their lives in an institution which can involve daily emotional torture by peers, among other issues. So, indeed, if you are always trying to fit in, pretend you are someone else, put energy into developing a beautiful or powerful superficial facade day in and day out from the ages of 5 to 18, how can we expect that we would have good use of our functions??

But to think that that is normal, I would have to argue vehemently against, although I'm sure that is exacty how the data is coming in.........I don't really see that in homeschooled children I know, who are outside that negatively influented realm. Just sayin/



Tangent Alert---> And, no, I personally don't think it was always like this. I think we used to be poorer or less educated, but I think we were more likely to self-actualize as adults than we are now. Forget self-actualization now; we're just trying to be happy. I don't think many even know who they are when they reach maturity.

 

[Kalach]

I'm very clear now that I do Te better than Ti and that it is a far more effective place of rest for the dominant. I can find in the over-50 crowd of type experts those whose tertiary has developed in the same attitude. And with good evidence. Why would we think that a theory that explains basic differences in humans would go on to encompass an immovable, innate path to development?

Coach, you're blowing my mind here. Te in service of Fe inside one person... you don't get headaches? Lots of tension? I'm not mocking, I'm seriously trying see what a tertiary oriented opposite to the dominant would be like. For any type that had this, the auxiliary and the tertiary would be competing for the same mental energy, wouldn't they?

I want to ask too, what's the difference between a cognitive function and an acquired mental skill set? Is there one? As I understand it, in the case of the tertiary, the answer is (within limits) there isn't a difference. The orientation of the tertiary function is, at least theoretically, a matter of choice and hard work...

 

[sculpting]

There's research into whole of type vs isolated function stuff suggesting that functions other than the dominant are NOT THE SAME as the same function when it's dominant. The research seems a bit wrong-headed inasmuch as they do things like take an INTJ and ENTJ and have naive observers say what they see in them, and they find big enough differences in the observations that the researchers decided to say means dominant Ni and auxiliary Ni are different beasts.

Isnt this sort of obvious-dom Te, Aux Te, Tert Te all differ? Or maybe the same basic underlying mechanism but enslaved to the interests of the higher function? So as an enfp I use Te, apply structure, metrics, build models and boxes, but I cram people into them. I people boxes. Then I develop predictive models based upon past trends-NeTe, I'd presume. I CAN use Te for other stuff-bipophysics, meh, but I LIKE using it on people possibilities most-due to NeFi. Likely the biophysics springs from a desire of NeFi to pattern match very complex systems.

Te doms are dominating and even power hungry at times. NeFi is not-yet sometimes I can sense Te urges in that direction, even in it's enslaved role as a tert.

I personally don't believe it's conscious at all. The mind works too fast, and processes too much information to need to consciously use functions, much less choose them.

I am an Se fail btw, but Ne is my universe and it appears i use Si for some stuff too.

Aphrodite, can you feel yourself using different functions? I very well could be broken, but I can clearly feel the diff between NeFi hyper puppy, Ne alone exploration, NeTe anger, NeTe analysis and especially Te functioning in isolation. Fi is much harder. Like today I am in a no-Fi mode. To find Fi, I'd need about a minute of deep breathing and it would still be an effort.

There is some amount of hormonal flux at work here-PMS makes my hyper active NeFi puppy, then NeTe bitchy puppy for instance, but I can often sort of identify where I need to be, and then just go there. It's like playing a violin and letting certain frequencies resonate together as the bow crosses the strings.

is this me using Te on myself maybe?

I love reading and thinking about theories but it's the ideas of what the possibilities are (like reforming math education throughout the world based on my research on S-N differences...) rather than the nuances of the theory.

Is this the influence of Fe? I actually like understanding the theories and digging it all into little pieces, but purely for the sake of the theory and understanding-not so much for real world applicability. I totally dig the nuances. They are my building blocks, so I need to make certain they are correct. I guess I havent found anybody yet who doesnt fit cleanly into the dom-tert in the same direction IRL.

I dunno, been watching middle judgers a lot but maybe I need more time with the Te doms and Fe doms.

I guess in the real world, I dont like the idea of helping individuals unless they have a very distinct Fi value to me. It's too energy intensive. I like the idea of rebuilding organizations to make them more productive, and identifying people pivot points, where a subtle tweak will make the whole system run more smoothly. (What job would this be btw?)

 

[sculpting]

Coach, you're blowing my mind here. Te in service of Fe inside one person... you don't get headaches? Lots of tension? I'm not mocking, I'm seriously trying see what a tertiary oriented opposite to the dominant would be like. For any type that had this, the auxiliary and the tertiary would be competing for the same mental energy, wouldn't they?

I want to ask too, what's the difference between a cognitive function and an acquired mental skill set? Is there one? As I understand it, in the case of the tertiary, the answer is (within limits) there isn't a difference. The orientation of the tertiary function is, at least theoretically, a matter of choice and hard work...

Couch I would supplement and ask-are you using Fe-which looks like Te on the surface?

I keep seeing this over and over again. My ENTP had a pretty deep discussion the other day about it. Fe can be highly organizational, controlling, and in the hands of a male-look very "Te" yet a bit more caring. I work two ISFJ men. They seem very Te at first to most folks. Like really nice ISTJs. They present themselves with authority, deep voices, the "right" facial gestures, a sense of dominance. They are working in a corporate enviornment where you need to "look" like an ISTJ-thus they have Fe learned to do so. I see a young ESTP doing the same thing-learning to mock an ESTJ persona. His Fe is learning what mask he needs to wear to Fe fit in with the Te executives.

You can spot them in two ways:
1. They manage via exclusivity and optimism. They exclude those with negative opinions and seek group harmony. They do not want to hear the bad news and will not seek outside guidance as it will not be in harmony with the message they want to hear.

2. They dont do logistics well. The real Te crap. I have 17 As, 13 Bs, and need to build 16ABs. Their answer: Team, let's get on it with no complaints. We have a deadline to meet.

We are all like, dude, you are missing 3 Bs....It is baffling to the mind.

My ENTPs pull it off much more effectively-they look Te-ish but my entp and I think it is an Ti-Fe combo. She says the Fe she uses on INFJs takes on a much sharper more pointed flavor, as the INFJs can outgame her on just Fe.

Her point-much like jeno's earlier-Does it matter what it is or is it effective? To me, I want theory, to her she needs results.

 

[Venom]

Isnt this sort of obvious-dom Te, Aux Te, Tert Te all differ? Or maybe the same basic underlying mechanism but enslaved to the interests of the higher function? So as an enfp I use Te, apply structure, metrics, build models and boxes, but I cram people into them. I people boxes. Then I develop predictive models based upon past trends-NeTe, I'd presume. I CAN use Te for other stuff-bipophysics, meh, but I LIKE using it on people possibilities most-due to NeFi. Likely the biophysics springs from a desire of NeFi to pattern match very complex systems.

Te doms are dominating and even power hungry at times. NeFi is not-yet sometimes I can sense Te urges in that direction, even in it's enslaved role as a tert.



I am an Se fail btw, but Ne is my universe and it appears i use Si for some stuff too.

Aphrodite, can you feel yourself using different functions? I very well could be broken, but I can clearly feel the diff between NeFi hyper puppy, Ne alone exploration, NeTe anger, NeTe analysis and especially Te functioning in isolation. Fi is much harder. Like today I am in a no-Fi mode. To find Fi, I'd need about a minute of deep breathing and it would still be an effort.

There is some amount of hormonal flux at work here-PMS makes my hyper active NeFi puppy, then NeTe bitchy puppy for instance, but I can often sort of identify where I need to be, and then just go there. It's like playing a violin and letting certain frequencies resonate together as the bow crosses the strings.

is this me using Te on myself maybe?



Is this the influence of Fe? I actually like understanding the theories and digging it all into little pieces, but purely for the sake of the theory and understanding-not so much for real world applicability. I totally dig the nuances. They are my building blocks, so I need to make certain they are correct. I guess I havent found anybody yet who doesnt fit cleanly into the dom-tert in the same direction IRL.

I dunno, been watching middle judgers a lot but maybe I need more time with the Te doms and Fe doms.

I guess in the real world, I dont like the idea of helping individuals unless they have a very distinct Fi value to me. It's too energy intensive. I like the idea of rebuilding organizations to make them more productive, and identifying people pivot points, where a subtle tweak will make the whole system run more smoothly. (What job would this be btw?)

Couch I would supplement and ask-are you using Fe-which looks like Te on the surface?

I keep seeing this over and over again. My ENTP had a pretty deep discussion the other day about it. Fe can be highly organizational, controlling, and in the hands of a male-look very "Te" yet a bit more caring. I work two ISFJ men. They seem very Te at first to most folks. Like really nice ISTJs. They present themselves with authority, deep voices, the "right" facial gestures, a sense of dominance. They are working in a corporate enviornment where you need to "look" like an ISTJ-thus they have Fe learned to do so. I see a young ESTP doing the same thing-learning to mock an ESTJ persona. His Fe is learning what mask he needs to wear to Fe fit in with the Te executives.

You can spot them in two ways:
1. They manage via exclusivity and optimism. They exclude those with negative opinions and seek group harmony. They do not want to hear the bad news and will not seek outside guidance as it will not be in harmony with the message they want to hear.

2. They dont do logistics well. The real Te crap. I have 17 As, 13 Bs, and need to build 16ABs. Their answer: Team, let's get on it with no complaints. We have a deadline to meet.

We are all like, dude, you are missing 3 Bs....It is baffling to the mind.

My ENTPs pull it off much more effectively-they look Te-ish but my entp and I think it is an Ti-Fe combo. She says the Fe she uses on INFJs takes on a much sharper more pointed flavor, as the INFJs can outgame her on just Fe.

Her point-much like jeno's earlier-Does it matter what it is or is it effective? To me, I want theory, to her she needs results.

So this is what Ne looks like without a judging function? All over the place and three times as complicated as my original understandings simply because of the unlimited possibilities considered?

My negative reaction definitely fits with socionics though, EIEs Id block is Fi Ne:

Ignoring function
A person limits the expression of this element in public (in favor of the base function), but uses it quite a lot in private.

Demonstrative function
A person uses the element in this function mainly as a kind of game, or to ridicule those who he thinks take it too seriously. He often intentionally goes against its conventional usage simply to prove a point in favor of his creative function

 

[Heart&Brain]

So this is what Ne looks like without a judging function? All over the place and three times as complicated as my original understandings simply because of the unlimited possibilities considered?

No-no, in my experience this isn't Ne unfiltered at all!

I think this is how Ne looks when it's skillfully processed and reigned in by aux Fi keeping the valuable hotspots burning and tert Te making it stick to the question at hand and deliver the intuitions with helpful examples, logical bullet-points and efficiently short enough for people to take it in.

(Meaning that, no, you wouldn't really want to be exposed to someone's freewheeling Ne... )