• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

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

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
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? :confused: :rofl1:

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

Interesting response. Is the tone of the text annoying to you or just the length and seeming discontinuity?

Ne would annoy you as a Te dom. Especially when I am on an info mission.

Sorry, it's how I roll. But as heart noted with a wee bit o' Fi and a bunch of weird fucked up Te to boot, so it isnt Ne in a vacuum.

Jeno once gave me some very good feedback about NeTe though-it can make connections that are not backed up by Ti detail, so please let me know if my observations at some point seem off or inconsistent with what you have personally observed. I take models, apply them to data, then reforge models. If it doesnt fit, then something is broken and I say so. I love argument if my model or data is inaccurate, because then I can fix it. I have no attachment to dogma given the known flaws in the models.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Isnt this sort of obvious-dom Te, Aux Te, Tert Te all differ?

Obvious? No. Not yet, anyway.

It would seem that extant characterisations of the functions are of the functions as they when they are dominant, which I presume means what the functions are when they are as fully conscious as they can be and pure, which seems to be to say when they are untainted by the presence of other functions. So, what are the functions when they exist in combination with other functions? Are they subsets of the pure function or are they the pure function refocused or are they qualitatively different entities altogether?

And if we're asking questions like this are we importing individuality and pretending we can still speak of purity? That is, should we prioritise purity of function or identity of the person? If we prioritise identity, then it's hard to talk of developing a function and making it mature because the pure standard is no longer more important than whatever change in usage the person decides is development. But if personal identity is not an issue at all, then... um, I dunno, but something doesn't seem right.

We know that functions do not exist in the pure form. We know that functions not dominant are subordinate in focus and usage to the dominant. We know that individuals can focus, perhaps temporarily, their function usage and bring less conscious functions into a conscious position, and perhaps thus make them temporarily dominant. And we know that whenever someone names a function, they are both pretending to talk of a pure function and at the same time probably importing personal experience of that kind of cognitive activity, so... um...

There's some kind of screwy thing going on here. The closer we come to speaking of individuals the further we move from pure classification and the further we are from being able to talk cleanly of functional aspects of individuals. But the purpose of MBTI consultation is to begin that clean, segmented, particulate talk with a view to strengthening the individual. Isn't it? We hit the bleeding edge of the applicability of the model and keep going anyway because the alternative is full on Jungian analysis and the model is just easier and quicker? So, what are we really describing--reality or a shortcut?
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Interesting response. Is the tone of the text annoying to you or just the length and seeming discontinuity?

Ne would annoy you as a Te dom. Especially when I am on an info mission.

Sorry, it's how I roll. But as heart noted with a wee bit o' Fi and a bunch of weird fucked up Te to boot, so it isnt Ne in a vacuum.

Jeno once gave me some very good feedback about NeTe though-it can make connections that are not backed up by Ti detail, so please let me know if my observations at some point seem off or inconsistent with what you have personally observed. I take models, apply them to data, then reforge models. If it doesnt fit, then something is broken and I say so. I love argument if my model or data is inaccurate, because then I can fix it. I have no attachment to dogma given the known flaws in the models.

BTW, Im a Fe dom. It was more of a humorous reaction. It felt like I was amidst a storm of chaos and I want to just say, "STOP! Ground all ships, and send them off ONE AT A TIME!...are we sure some of these flights arent redundant?" :D
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Psht I am no Si user!

ya...the EXACT thing I was thinking! I actually like how socionics makes it a point that Si is the absolute worst function of ENxJs
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
There's some kind of screwy thing going on here. The closer we come to speaking of individuals the further we move from pure classification and the further we are from being able to talk cleanly of functional aspects of individuals. But the purpose of MBTI consultation is to begin that clean, segmented, particulate talk with a view to strengthening the individual. Isn't it? We hit the bleeding edge of the applicability of the model and keep going anyway because the alternative is full on Jungian analysis and the model is just easier and quicker? So, what are we really describing--reality or a shortcut?

Meh...you don't have to go beyond the first and second function for type to be useful and for people to find themselves. And that isn't a shortcut. It's the most useful part of the theory for everyday interactions. In fact if people could just develop their first and second functions well, the world would be a better place. If you think a majority have, go join a committee or a volunteer board somewhere...

As for MBTI consultation...any good practitioner does take into account personal differences, if it's being used for counseling or coaching. That includes NOT assuming they even know how to use their first two functions. I often don't know their type results in the first meeting--we talk to see if it's even appropriate. The third and fourth functions...where they need to develop comes from conversations about goals, problems, relationship difficulties, tension at work, failed dreams, etc. It does not come from following a road map on how a type is supposed to develop.
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
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...

Well, otherwise you have the dominant and tertiary competing...why would that be any easier, even though you're pulled toward Perceiving or Judging?

Cognitive function and acquired mental skill set...that's just it. Few people who really reflect on type come away thinking "I've mastered that third function! I've arrived." It always takes more conscious effort. For me Ti requires more effort that Te. Writing my doctoral dissertation was the most painful thing I've ever done--I had a matrix in front of me of exactly what points I was trying to make and the sequential, logical support and evidence for each point. And I was a professional writer/editor going into the program!! I"m working on another research journal article right now and I have to bribe myself to sit still and do it. My mind constantly shifts to possibilities for more research/what if we'd.../how could we use this in.... back to Ni.

As far as any function in service to another, we can wrestle any function to conscious control if our mission is strong enough. Myers herself is a perfect example. INFP, dominant Fi, who actually invented two statistical processes that no one else used until there were supercomputers (she was simultaneously correlating multiple sets of items on a hand calculator back in the 1960's)--all T in service to her vision of (HONEST) world peace if people just better understood each other...
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Meh...you don't have to go beyond the first and second function for type to be useful and for people to find themselves. And that isn't a shortcut. It's the most useful part of the theory for everyday interactions. In fact if people could just develop their first and second functions well, the world would be a better place. If you think a majority have, go join a committee or a volunteer board somewhere...

Actually, I wanted to say thanks for pointing out the distinction between use and mature mastery. It is indeed something to reflect on and is illuminating.

As for MBTI consultation...any good practitioner does take into account personal differences, if it's being used for counseling or coaching. That includes NOT assuming they even know how to use their first two functions. I often don't know their type results in the first meeting--we talk to see if it's even appropriate. The third and fourth functions...where they need to develop comes from conversations about goals, problems, relationship difficulties, tension at work, failed dreams, etc. It does not come from following a road map on how a type is supposed to develop.

*grumble, grumble, grumble* A consultant with Fe would.

Or probably any consultant would, but meanwhile I'm being Mr Systems. Particularly with respect to the subconscious. I've taken it to be true that subconscious functions have a significant effect on the operating parameters of the dominant and auxiliary functions. Thus it's preferable to get a theory handle on the tertiary and inferior somehow.

Well, otherwise you have the dominant and tertiary competing...why would that be any easier, even though you're pulled toward Perceiving or Judging?

True. But theoretically the competition is not nearly so direct. If the auxiliary and tertiary both have the same orientation, then they're both either perceiving or both judging, and both doing it on the same turf.

Theoretically, if it's to be healthy, the tertiary will always bow to the auxiliary. Or be called into play when the auxiliary isn't looking. Or something like that. It sounds uncomfortable.

PS. I'm still not attempting to say your self-report is wrong. I'm looking for how the theory should adjust to accommodate it.

Cognitive function and acquired mental skill set...that's just it. Few people who really reflect on type come away thinking "I've mastered that third function! I've arrived." It always takes more conscious effort. For me Ti requires more effort that Te. Writing my doctoral dissertation was the most painful thing I've ever done--I had a matrix in front of me of exactly what points I was trying to make and the sequential, logical support and evidence for each point. And I was a professional writer/editor going into the program!! I"m working on another research journal article right now and I have to bribe myself to sit still and do it. My mind constantly shifts to possibilities for more research/what if we'd.../how could we use this in.... back to Ni.

Well, see, I notice several things. For example, like you mentioned before, consciously choosing to exercise the inferior function provides rest and rejuvenation for the person. (Assuming of course that they don't go full on into "the grip"). I recognise this as true. But then I also believe inferior anxiety is real too. That built in thing where concerns about the operation of the inferior influence what one decides for major projects--like when the inferior function is supposed to be used in conjunction with all the others, not just for play. And those uses of the inferior seem much harder than play uses. Like, assuming an Se inferior, I can ride my bike and have a lot of fun, but actually operationalising some management decision is stressful, details go missing, and I overcompensate for lack of control, forcing more rules and tightening the screws harder on people who are meant to be cooperating.


THE MODEL MUST STAND! If I am forced to deal directly with people as people I shall retreat to MY tertiary and lose my ability to think! AAARRGH!
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
THE MODEL MUST STAND! If I am forced to deal directly with people as people I shall retreat to MY tertiary and lose my ability to think! AAARRGH!

But is this contrary to the model if the model really is...You develop a dominant and auxiliary that give you a way to perceive and judge, and a way to deal with the external and internal worlds. Myers and Briggs designed the 4-letter code to point to this order.

The hardest thing to do is the inferior. It's a form of rest, yes, but as you say when you're forced to overuse it or use it under stress or forget that it would be a good idea to use it in certain circumstances (like Ni's noting where they park in multilevel ramps) it's a source of being in the grip.

And the tertiary...well...is it against the model, really, if it turns out that it develops different ways based on family/education/culture/experiences?

I'm in email conversations right now with two of the top type theorists. We're all doing this analysis and comparing notes. Two of us think our tertiary is opposite the dominant, one in the same attitude. And we're all old enough to have plenty to reflect on.

I know it's not nice and neat. but life seldom is...:cry:
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
*grumble, grumble, grumble* A consultant with Fe would.

LOL I was just training a bunch of T coaches and they admitted, "We write the critique first. Then we go back in the email and put in, Good morning, how are you, how's the baby? Nice weather..." etc. They said, "We know how to do it and why we have to, but we really don't care whether they feel good about our email or not. We just want them to take action per our advice."

How's that for use of tertiary or inferior as a skil...
 

Wonkavision

Retired Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
1,154
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w8
[/LIST]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........

This is an awesome description of Ne. 'Tis what I do all the time. :D

Thanks!

This is from Hartzler? I'll have to Google that.....
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
But is this contrary to the model if the model really is...You develop a dominant and auxiliary that give you a way to perceive and judge, and a way to deal with the external and internal worlds. Myers and Briggs designed the 4-letter code to point to this order.

Oh, I know. But if I have to be a harmonzing wholistic interactor dealing with the person rather than the task...

And the tertiary...well...is it against the model, really, if it turns out that it develops different ways based on family/education/culture/experiences?

Hmmm.... well, reality rules the theory, so if the old guys are reporting it that way....


Um, does opinion on the orientation of the tertiary vary according to the type of the theorist?

I notice there are INTJs around the place saying they have a developed sense of Fe, and INFJs saying they rock the Te... could it be they've turned their normal theory-given functions to matured purposes... a long range Ni vision that supports turning the regular Te for INTJ and Fe for INFJ to what looks like the other extroverted judging function? And they support it by the normal operation of a standard Ji? Or something?

If the tertiary is malleable and comes to relative prominence in mid-life but in one or the other orientation, what was it before then? In the younger years while environment is working its magic, what was the tertiary? This is all covered by saying "while young, a person's tertiary function is for the most part undifferentiated, not easily accessible to consciousness and as yet of no determinate orientation"?
 

Venom

Babylon Candle
Joined
Feb 10, 2008
Messages
2,126
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
1w9
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Meh...you don't have to go beyond the first and second function for type to be useful and for people to find themselves.

...In fact if people could just develop their first and second functions well, the world would be a better place. If you think a majority have, go join a committee or a volunteer board somewhere...

....That includes NOT assuming they even know how to use their first two functions.

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 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!!!)

...Most barely get past stereotypes of the first two.

I briefly read a little bit of those links you gave me last time when I prodded you about the step III. However, THIS stuff (the quoted stuff) is what really intrigues me the most. I would say that almost 90% of the online profiles paint the types as being very proficient at their first two functions and if anything, "you're too proficient with those first two, you need to develop your inferior and tertiary right away!".

The idea that you could be a really "shitty" INTP or a "shitty" ESFJ because of a lack of ability with the dominant is fascinating. Would these be INTPs who struggle with thinking logically and ESFJs who struggle at playing the loyalties game? Or would it be like 90% of online sites who say, "you might be too rational mr INTP!" or "your not logical enough mrs esfj!"??? :confused:

Do you understand the distinction Im making? Online always points out overuse of dominant problems, while I think you're pointing out under use of dominant auxiliary problems? I wish there were written examples of these "under use" people.

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!! :D

Not to brag, but I intuitively noticed this a while ago :D
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
I briefly read a little bit of those links you gave me last time when I prodded you about the step III. However, THIS stuff (the quoted stuff) is what really intrigues me the most. I would say that almost 90% of the online profiles paint the types as being very proficient at their first two functions and if anything, "you're too proficient with those first two, you need to develop your inferior and tertiary right away!".

Do you really think that most extraverted types who are under 25 have spent enough time alone, in conscious reflection, to really develop conscious use of their auxiliary? Do you really think most Introverts under 25 have been in situations that honor their reflective style of processing enough that they have developed their auxiliary? Many, many E's and I's have, but many have not. If you doubt me, look at the level of consumer debt, the attrition rate at colleges, the rate of divorce...or Wall Street or Congress or Toyota or...(and I still like my Prius, now that the brakes are fixed...).

Maybe you have to get old and look back on those years to sigh and wish you'd spent more time in that opposite attitude to develop the first two functions in balance...or before you realize how much effort it took to use that second one well.

A ton of the online resources are full of stereotypes. Do any help you analyze whether you're using the first two well? Somewhere here I mentioned rethinking decisions to see how well you used each function...

The idea that you could be a really "shitty" INTP or a "shitty" ESFJ because of a lack of ability with the dominant is fascinating. Would these be INTPs who struggle with thinking logically and ESFJs who struggle at playing the loyalties game? Or would it be like 90% of online sites who say, "you might be too rational mr INTP!" or "your not logical enough mrs esfj!"??? :confused:

Using a function well means that you have conscious control, trust it, and would be judged by others to use it effectively. I guess I'd consider an ESFJ immature if he/she uses Fe to step into the shoes of others and figure out how to best wound them. Or, how to manipulate a room for some purpose not healthy to all. Because I view maturity as realizing that we're all in this together on this planet (even Spock, the connsumate INTP, knew that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few)

For INTP, they may not have learned to question their models sufficiently. Maybe they've spent their Ti time trying to win Zelda rather than building their own models, so you get immature use of the function...

Or, perhaps they've grown up in environments where they aren't allowed to use one of the functions. An ENFP who grows up with rigid (as opposed to mature) SJ parents and siblings may have a really hard time learning to value their Ne since it's squashed every time with, "Keep your feet on the ground and head out of the clouds. No son/daughter of mine is going to be a musician/artist/teacher with a low salary/etc."
Do you understand the distinction Im making? Online always points out overuse of dominant problems, while I think you're pointing out under use of dominant auxiliary problems? I wish there were written examples of these "under use" people.

Both can get you into trouble, so you won't suffer by trying to recognize when your dominant is out of control. In fact our research showed that the point of collapse in crisis is when the dominant is simply not helpful. It's like the rug is pulled out from under you. Examples: INTJs carefully execute a plan and it has no success whatsoever. ENFPs search for every option under the sun only to realize that there is no solution (I watched a friend collapse this way in dealing with a schitzophrenic daughter...believing he could solve it all until the girl nearly knifed his wife...) ESTPs suddenly realize that there is nothing to enjoy in the present moment. Etc.


Not to brag, but I intuitively noticed this a while ago :D[/QUOTE]

To roughly quote Naomi Quenk, who holds to the tertiary in the opposite attitude to the dominant, preference for a function includes a preference for its orientation, but doesn't preclude use of that preference in the other attitude. Hence the lack of need for eight functions in a row or at least in apparent order...
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
Um, does opinion on the orientation of the tertiary vary according to the type of the theorist?

Let's see, of those I know their views:

Tertiary opposite the dominant: INTJ, ENTP, ENFJ, ISTJ

Tertiary in the same attitude: 4 INFPs, INTP, INFJ

I'll have more information on this in a few months as there's a research project going on...
I notice there are INTJs around the place saying they have a developed sense of Fe, and INFJs saying they rock the Te... could it be they've turned their normal theory-given functions to matured purposes... a long range Ni vision that supports turning the regular Te for INTJ and Fe for INFJ to what looks like the other extroverted judging function? And they support it by the normal operation of a standard Ji? Or something?

Well...they may be oblivious to the amount of energy required for them to use a function. And yes, we often talk about developing functions in service to the dominant. That's why people who accomplish great things often have a change of how they operate--who they're trying to influence/what credentials they believe they need/who they partner with/which arena they try to play in...because they harness those other functions in service to their mission or purpose, becoming more individuated, and therefore more effective.
If the tertiary is malleable and comes to relative prominence in mid-life but in one or the other orientation, what was it before then? In the younger years while environment is working its magic, what was the tertiary? This is all covered by saying "while young, a person's tertiary function is for the most part undifferentiated, not easily accessible to consciousness and as yet of no determinate orientation"?

Yeah, it wasn't under conscious control in any way. Parents who really understand type use the order of functions in figuring out how to discipline their children. Te who gets too crabby with a teacher? Time out to write apology notes gets at Ni--imagining losing that teacher's respect...and Fi--how would I feel without that? Etc.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
To roughly quote Naomi Quenk, who holds to the tertiary in the opposite attitude to the dominant, preference for a function includes a preference for its orientation, but doesn't preclude use of that preference in the other attitude. Hence the lack of need for eight functions in a row or at least in apparent order...

The best thing I've come up with so far, is this model:

Ni/Fe/Ti
Ne/Fi/Te
S

Where the second tier rotates in and out of the top tier, which is the more comfortable tier for me. This could change depending on life circumstances however, like if I stop contemplating theory much and focus more on organizational household skills, I would be more like this, although is wouldn't be my ideal life circumstance:

Ni/Fe/Te
Ne/Fi/Ti
S

I guess what I think is that the dom and aux are relatively fixed, yet have help from the NINJA two functions on a relatively frequent basis that fall immediately below them. The bottom tier is not defined yet by me, but it is pulled as needed, or can be utilized for growth at various times.

This model allows for a more 3 dimensional explanation of function usage, which is more applicable to a complex human mind.

If a person shares his dom function role with 2 perceiving preferences, as is my theory depending on his genetics, say Ni and Si, his function model might appear like this:

[Ni/Si]/Te/Fi
[Ne/Se]/Ti/Fe

If he splits between his N/S and F/T (both preferences), his function model might appear like this, with him being able to shift functions around pretty flexibly:

[Ni/Si]/[Te/Fe]
[Ne/Se]/[Ti/Fi]





I think the tert function controversy exists because the interplay between the tert function attitude is so fluid in one's life. Yes, the dom and aux functions will remain relatively fixed, but that tert function will shape shift frequently.

My hypothesis? That when it's aligned in the same attitude as the dominant function, you are achieving something. Call this growth or change or whatever; our ideal of living to our full capacity. When the tert is in the orientation opposite the dominant function, we are going on a tangent, living more of a status quo life, or just sort-of hanging out, either in our own mind (introverted attitude), or in the world(extraverted attitude). We are gaining ground when the tert is aligned with the dom, in other words.

Just some ideas...........
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
In this "ninja" analogy, think of the attitudes by themselves as doing the "swinging": not a complete function+attitude combination. It just means that the ego is changing the normal orientation of the associated function. Actually, it should just be
i e i e
NFTS
e i e i,

with i and e orbiting each function. The first two will be more stable, but the other two might switch more. Hence, many people having tertiary and inferior as the actual weakest functions (ala lasagna model)
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
In this "ninja" analogy, think of the attitudes by themselves as doiglng the "swinging": not a complete function+attitude combination. It just means that the ego is changing the normal orientation of the associated function. Actually, it should just be
i eie
NFTS
e ie i,

with i and e orbiting each function. The first two will be more stable, but the other two might switch more. Hence, many people having tertiary and inferior as the actual weakest functions (ala lasagna model)


Hah! I like it! I know you are the conceptual model Type C guru! But I'd call it more the spaghetti model. Because there's a lot of twisting around going on. :smile: I especially like how you worked the word "swinging" in there. Niice. ;)

And this is good except for those that have a preference split due to inherited genetic traits; someone that might have an N/S dom/codom model.
 

Polaris

AKA Nunki
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,529
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
If you ask which order the functions are supposed to be in, you're missing the point altogether, at least if you're trying to use the MBTI in a realistic manner. The function lineups should be understood as more or less arbitrary orderings chosen for the sake of simplicity. Ideally, every possible ordering would have its own unique profile, but in practice, anything more than 16 types risks making things excessively complicated. The best thing you can do is look at which type you most relate to, and go from there. If you become fixated on finding the "right" function lineups, all you're doing is redefining what it means to be a member of a certain type.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Hah! I like it! I know you are the conceptual model Type C guru! But I'd call it more the spaghetti model. Because there's a lot of twisting around going on. :smile: I especially like how you worked the word "swinging" in there. Niice. ;)

And this is good except for those that have a preference split due to inherited genetic traits; someone that might have an N/S dom/codom model.
Funny thing; I don't even know where I got the word "swinging". I thought you used it, and was typing that on the phone, zooming in the screen because I forgot my glasses.
 
Top