• 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.

Dom-tertiary loops and personality disorders

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Eric, can you clarify what exactly you mean when you say "product" vs archetypical example?

That was Lenore's way of putting it [he asked, Jag!:chillpill:], and from the contexts, it would mean the behaviors or skills we have come to associate with the functions. The things we actually "use". So for Se; it would be current sensory input. Everyone uses this every minute of every day, yet we distinguish SP types as particular "Se users".
What really is the difference between them and evey other type? With them, Se denotes a particular perspective where current senses are their preferred input method. For others, it is what is called "undifferentiated" as far as being such a specific perspective.

So then "experiencing the current senses" then, which often is used as the definition of "Se", can be thought of as a product of the function, as distinct from a differentiated Se perspective. All people use the product; only for some is it apart of a preferred perspective that defines their type.

Otherwise, we run on all the problems many confused about type have, where they thnk they "use" a function too much to be a certain type. Or we would wonder how NP's and SJ's could see, hear, smell, etc. or try to force those activities into an archetypal role (demon, opposing, etc).
How can we consciously engage a function, yet still have it remain as part of a shadow? Is it that the function can oscillate between different uses at different times? (I could see this...)
It would be these "products" we can become more aware of, and the archetype/complex perspective that lies in the shadow.

I'm not sure that when Beebe says the 7th function develops right behind the tertiary, whether he meant the specific Trickster archetype, or just the undifferentiated function the Trickster sometimes encases. On the other hand, Lenore says the Trickster manifests only in very special cases. So I'm taking sort of a middle view.

Can you elaborate regarding what "paying attention" to the aux function actually is for different functions? I understand what this means for Fi...but for others...
I can give my own example: When I internalize the principles of how something works (anything in the environment), I can then lock onto it with a perspective of memory, and ignore other possibilities. That way; I maintain a purely internal outlook. Ti-Si. To allow awareness of other possibilities is to pay attention to the external auxilary perspective.
*giggles* I might have noticed the Lennore thing as well...but I figured it was Ti hard at work. :) But you have very good ideas and I find your ref suggestions very helfpul. Jag I must say I do adore the tert function alert. That is hysterical.

Eric, on this note, jag does have a good point. MBTI has some very apparent flaws. From a marketing perspective to admit your entire system has flaws would be a pretty bad move, given revenue and established if questionable pool of data. You would have to build another test, gather many more stats and data, totally re-market it and end up competing against yourself. But once past that it all becomes theoretical...so open to a lot of room for reinvention and new thought.
I don't quite understand the point. People like Lenore probably think that MBTI and others' use of of the concepts are often flawed by virtue of straying from their Jungian moorings.

It seems that in Ne doms, the choice to use the tert is a protective one. Why do other MBTI types develop the tert at the expense of the aux? I say "develop" as "choice" is a nonideal term.
That's the "tertiary defense". It's to maintain the dominant perspective.
How do other types become familiar with their complexes and help this process of evolving the unconscious into consciousness? ENFPs chew on them via internal Fi and external Te discussions...
The complexes we often project onto others, and when you learn to recognize them in yourself, you will withdraw the projections, and become more open to the related perspectives.

In other words, an ENFP, who sees the theory through the lens of Fi, will use it primarily for NeFi purposes, such as possible ways to understand and improve one's self. A Ti perspective which dwells on the logical frameworks for their own sake he might distrust.
Like I had one ENFP tell me that "all the stuff about witches triggering puers is excuses for bad behavior". This in response to an explanation of a conflict using the framework of the eight-functional intertype dynamics (the stuff of Ti). The person saw it as if it were being spoken by a bad child making excuses for his mischief. This is the Trickster archetype they are seeing in someone else. However, when they react to it, they themselves might end up acting like bad children. They are projecting a complex onto others that is in their unconscious. If they stop projecting, it will more likely be brought under some conscious control.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I dont know what grudge the author of the op holds against Patrick Bateman; I mean really he is a decent guy, obviously working hard to fit in society and be an exemplary member of his race. Really that poor guy, you cant give him so less credit. Besides that he's obviously brilliant and even keeps his house clean when killing the occasional co-worker that just had better results this day than he had.

Ok bad jokes aside... funny post :)
 

PeaceBaby

reborn
Joined
Jan 7, 2009
Messages
5,950
MBTI Type
N/A
Enneagram
N/A
A few thoughts:

Jag, I like it when you write longer posts like this. I enjoy the expansion of your POV. sim would be itching to respond, were he here. :)

-----

There are some good replies to sim's post at PC: Dominant-Tertiary Loops and Common Personality Disorders - PersonalityCafe

-----

Why do we hold Jung's work as truth, the gold standard? At a certain point in time, we may chuck it out the window as total bupkus ... (No offense intended and sorry if that sounds irreverent; I just see the argument "They have strayed from Jung's work / intention" as a weak form of counter-argument to invalidate MBTI etc. from time to time.)

example above from Eric's post: "People like Lenore probably think that MBTI and others' use of of the concepts are often flawed by virtue of straying from their Jungian moorings."

Just a thought.

-----

I think if sim had avoided giving his loops "names" such as "X Personality Disorder" it would have made better fodder for discussion instead of appearing definitive. He does offer a disclaimer later in the PC thread.

-----

Orobas, how does it feel to be a case study in one of sim's posts? LOL!
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
Still intresting to know why someone who has a paranoid personality disorder needs to know that he's infp and vice versa and overall of these things how it really helps him to gain anything.

Reading up on mbti and the creation of new systems like the one in the op out of mbti strikes me like the description for paranoid personality disorder in the op.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
First, Eric, I will put thought into your responses. Because you lead with Ti...I often really have to work to understand you, thus a quick Ne fly over does not do your posts justice and it would be impolite to address without deep consideration of content.

Why do we hold Jung's work as truth, the gold standard? At a certain point in time, we may chuck it out the window as total bupkus ... (No offense intended and sorry if that sounds irreverent; I just see the argument "They have strayed from Jung's work / intention" as a weak form of counter-argument to invalidate MBTI etc. from time to time.)

Orobas, how does it feel to be a case study in one of sim's posts? LOL!

Sim got to come back yesterday! (Hmmmm, had I known I might have held off on that lawnmower eulogy by a day...:cheese:)

As for Jung and MBTI, I have started giving MBTI Type IIs and the results are honestly a clusterfuck. I am seeing a lot of tertiary and some inferior function contamination of the results...on Type II it is very obvious this happens as the subscales will be skewed.

Jung....well Jung found the nexus? the pivot point of the problem? Someone suggested he might actually have been NiTi, oddly, on another site....

I must say, to see me being used as a case study initially provoked a slight Fi defensive reaction for about 3 seconds. REALLY? Then I thought it was funny as hell! Sim is cute and adorable in a pissy baby punk entp way. Last year it would have hurt my feelings though as I was much less secure in my self understanding.

My next response was frustration at his model due to the errors and I felt a need to start poking at the broken parts-he TOTALLY missed how important Si is and how the (aux-inf) do not co-develop. That's the coolest part!!! (learned from Kalach the INTJ by the way.)

Funny, I suggest his button pushing is him building a TiSi library....but he missed how he has a separate FeSi library that says quit pushing buttons.

It is an interesting Ti/Te case study as I posted the enfp/bpd and entp npd stuff last March in a blog based on things I had directly observed, but never felt comfortable extending as I did not have Te evidence to support moving to other functional types. Thus my Te stopped where my Si stopped. Sim actually takes and extends the idea across all types as an NeTi construct. It REALLY makes me wary as I have not seen those other personality types and have no Si data to support his NeTi construct, so I cant trust it based upon my own internal perception/judging.....but must trust his instead.

Is this the human condition? I will never have Se, thus I must learn to find Se users I can trust? and so on down the functions....

I actually thought his ENFP example was Little Linguist.

Hmmm, well lots of enfps show up with this exact same question here. In the real world we are forced to hide our Fi or get mauled by the Ti/Fe users of all varieties. We adapt Fi in many ways to do this. But the end diversity you see in ENFPs still argues the model he proposed. (That's my way of saying, shit did I Ne into this one....hehehe, maybe...:D)



Still intresting to know why someone who has a paranoid personality disorder needs to know that he's infp and vice versa and overall of these things how it really helps him to gain anything.

Reading up on mbti and the creation of new systems like the one in the op out of mbti strikes me like the description for paranoid personality disorder in the op.

I'd say if there was meat to this idea, it might give some hope to BPD and NPD folks-a treatment path, thus while I do agree with Jag that functions are not everything, understanding what functions may be in play can help in understanding a path for this illnesses, both which are terribly devastating to the people who have them and those around them. Right now the advice is "Run away from them."
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I'd say if there was meat to this idea, it might give some hope to BPD and NPD folks-a treatment path, thus while I do agree with Jag that functions are not everything, understanding what functions may be in play can help in understanding a path for this illnesses, both which are terribly devastating to the people who have them and those around them. Right now the advice is "Run away from them."

True. To me it's still unbelieveable to grasp and understand the magic of mbti and where it is coming from. This means, it wasnt impossible to understand disorders or normal personality traits before mbti, but with mbti now seemingly everything falls magically in place and makes a logical sense and can even be connected to each other to form a coherent whole.

I am still suspicious about it, the theory of autosuggestion is for me the strongest enemy of mbti theory there is; therefore I'ld like to embrace the mbti theory or theories around it, but it still just feels wrong to me and I'ld be afraid if the only thing I could define a person about would be: yeah he is Fi or Te and so on.

To not give mbti to much discredit, its descriptions of the functions enabled me to widen my perception of people and give me new ideas about them and I think that's what they are intended to be; so you just have to watch that you understand the theory itself and not get caught up on its formulations, but what still intrests me is how mankind coped with those things before mbti. And I am more and more conviced that they didnt at all.
 

Tamske

Writing...
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
1,764
MBTI Type
ENTP
Could specific dom-tert loops correspond to specific mental issues?

I used to know an ENTP narcist. Now with hindsight I would associate it to Ne-Fe...

Ne: Ideasideasideas!
Fe: I need praise for them!
 

miss fortune

not to be trusted
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
20,589
Enneagram
827
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
:thinking:

so we're talking order and not strength here... and then strengths got thrown in as well? :huh:

I have a freakish strength order, with a few of my bottom 4 functions being stronger than some of my top 4 functions... especially my truly shitty inferior :doh:
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Why do we hold Jung's work as truth, the gold standard? At a certain point in time, we may chuck it out the window as total bupkus ... (No offense intended and sorry if that sounds irreverent; I just see the argument "They have strayed from Jung's work / intention" as a weak form of counter-argument to invalidate MBTI etc. from time to time.)

example above from Eric's post: "People like Lenore probably think that MBTI and others' use of of the concepts are often flawed by virtue of straying from their Jungian moorings."
I'm not totally bound to Jung like that, but sometimes, if you're going to use the person's concepts, it is better to keep it in line with the underlying framework. When you begin removing things out of the author's original contexts, you may create a lot of confusion. Yes, we can do this at times, but you have to be really careful with it.

Prime example is treating the functions as behaviors and dividing between e/i function attitude too much, and then using these behaviors as solid indicators of type. (Lenore suggested that this was the influence of temperament theory, and temperament focuses more on "affective' behavior). Again, this leads to the problem of types not fitting because one thinks they "use" the wrong functions too much.
In Jung's conception, there were four functions, and the orientation was really distinct in itself. When I realized this, then it became easy to understand things such as the Tertiary being either/or orientation, and how the shadows work.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
True. To me it's still unbelieveable to grasp and understand the magic of mbti and where it is coming from. This means, it wasnt impossible to understand disorders or normal personality traits before mbti, but with mbti now seemingly everything falls magically in place and makes a logical sense and can even be connected to each other to form a coherent whole.

I am still suspicious about it, the theory of autosuggestion is for me the strongest enemy of mbti theory there is; therefore I'ld like to embrace the mbti theory or theories around it, but it still just feels wrong to me and I'ld be afraid if the only thing I could define a person about would be: yeah he is Fi or Te and so on.

To not give mbti to much discredit, its descriptions of the functions enabled me to widen my perception of people and give me new ideas about them and I think that's what they are intended to be; so you just have to watch that you understand the theory itself and not get caught up on its formulations, but what still intrests me is how mankind coped with those things before mbti. And I am more and more conviced that they didnt at all.

I think you are totally correct, I like the functions a lot...(jag calls me Ms. Boxy!)

but Jung didnt stay here...he kept moving past it, which says it isnt the end all of everything...there are some other layers...there is a lot more complexity.

I think the functions are kinda neat Ti/Te things to play with...but once you add in Fe and Fi to filter data from the world, you can see amazing shades of grey that permeate everything and everyone. So if you take a person and plug them into a jungian functional pattern, it is like taking a high res image, compressing it, then blowing it back up again... you lose a lot of data. Sometimes this is okay, but sometimes not.

The Ni doms are seeing some other stuff too that I dont understand....

Mankind I think coped using mutual projections.

Jung said we all endlessly project our own understanding/perception/judgment of the world onto others. We assume they are thinking what we are thinking, so the misunderstandings never crop up as nobody ever dissects them to the level we do here. When misunderstandings crop up, we assume the other is behaving in an intentionally bad way and just label them and walk away.

Mostly...well...mostly people arent evil (except for this girl INTP i know. pure evil.). They are acting out their pattern...which conflicts with our pattern. We then assume that the other person thinks like us, thus must be motivated like us, thus must be acting with ill intent or selfishness or something else to be doing what they are doing. "Why else would they be behaving that way? I would never behave that way."

But these are just my thoughts.....but I would love to see this stuff help people if it could....(thats what motivates enfps...)
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Yeah; I forgot exactly what your position on her was. But sorry; just giving credit where it's due.
She may not have those credentials, but she has tried to be truer to Jung, the author of these concepts, moreso than many others who have moved the theory off of its moorings.

She is not true to Jung when she refers to a "J or P worldview." Jung didn't even create the J/P. Myers did. Lenore is so busy cramming pop culture into her work, I can't help but wonder if she was beamed up with Captain Kirk and Scotty.

No one I have referenced makes the inferior out to be any "demon child".

Lenore is no fan of the inferior, Eric. The woman's approach is paranoid. I can't help but wonder if she thinks the Illuminati are out to get her. Only in this case, the Illuminati is the inferior function. It's "subversive" and it "siphons off," as if to suggest we have a deceitful CIA vampire lurking within us all - sucking our skulls dry, while we sleep. :wink:

As for turning those "loops" into "personality disorders"; I haven't really bought into that

That's wise.

I like the functions a lot...(jag calls me Ms. Boxy!)

Calling you Ms. Boxy, has nothing to do with liking functions. Lol.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
I think you are totally correct, I like the functions a lot...(jag calls me Ms. Boxy!)

but Jung didnt stay here...he kept moving past it, which says it isnt the end all of everything...there are some other layers...there is a lot more complexity.

I think the functions are kinda neat Ti/Te things to play with...but once you add in Fe and Fi to filter data from the world, you can see amazing shades of grey that permeate everything and everyone. So if you take a person and plug them into a jungian functional pattern, it is like taking a high res image, compressing it, then blowing it back up again... you lose a lot of data. Sometimes this is okay, but sometimes not.

The Ni doms are seeing some other stuff too that I dont understand....

Mankind I think coped using mutual projections.

Jung said we all endlessly project our own understanding/perception/judgment of the world onto others. We assume they are thinking what we are thinking, so the misunderstandings never crop up as nobody ever dissects them to the level we do here. When misunderstandings crop up, we assume the other is behaving in an intentionally bad way and just label them and walk away.

Mostly...well...mostly people arent evil (except for this girl INTP i know. pure evil.). They are acting out their pattern...which conflicts with our pattern. We then assume that the other person thinks like us, thus must be motivated like us, thus must be acting with ill intent or selfishness or something else to be doing what they are doing. "Why else would they be behaving that way? I would never behave that way."

But these are just my thoughts.....but I would love to see this stuff help people if it could....(thats what motivates enfps...)



To do know a very un-entpish thing: you're right. :) Normally I now had to keep the position on which side I switched and defend it, but tho I could find some arguements, after thinking about it, youi are definitly right.

If you see the functions like your entry fee to the cosmic circus that lies behind that, then mbti is indeed a good thing. I have no clue what my self-conscience would be at today, if I hadnt been presented the mbti ideas about how different people could approach life. I very early sensed a difference between more people oriented people and more factual oriented people, but to add a thing like abstract thinking, which mbti defines via Intuition, this idea I'ld have had probably very late in my own studies and a lot of things wouldnt have made sense until then.

To me it has always been impossible to understand other people in any way at all. I am good at reflecting the emotions they show or recognizing recurring patterns in behaviour I can then associate to a somewhat understanding of a person, to get along with said person very good on a friend basis but I was never able to really deeply understand a human being or to even see what made this human being.

After I met my girlfriend, of whom I think she is infj, I was presented an outstanding knowledge of the human nature. She like looks a person ion the face and she can tell you the whole persons story. It's amazing and the most amazing thing about it is it works in reality for her on a daily basis and she doesnt even recognize it as a talent. So this is like active applied sciences and not only grey theory like mbti.

But: when I confronted her with mbti, she thought of it as bullshit. This deeply alienated me from mbti theory, cause I've seen her talent and if a capable person makes the call, I trust her. So I ran through the world typing everything and noone really understood wtf I'm talking about really.

So, and I think this is an insight I just had lately and which first came when my mind gave up on categorically trieing to systematize the whole world with mbti terms ( and it just gave up cause some really illogical inconsiestencies came up, like people who didnt really fit into the system or me being unsure on a daily basis, am I ass-kicking entj now or rather confused coffee-drinking entp or whatever).... the insight: I got stuck at the entry, what mbti provided and not more.

Since I've settled down and thought about the character traits the functions want to show, I got to know them better and learned what they mean. Now I am able to even unconciously assert situations where you cope with people better, cause I do understand them better. I gained a new set of perception on people from mbti.

And since that is possible for me and I dont talk in mumbojumbo mbti terms to my girlfriend, she perfectly understands what I am talking about. So the real thing mbti lacked was me interpreting it and dealing with it right.

It's still until today a flawed logical system to me, but as I said above it doesnt want to be seen as a logical system, cause its static approach can never really grasp human dynamics, just give a new perception on things. That's a thing I failed to understand and until today I still want to be something like a 100% entp or 100% entj, tho this is completly ridicoulus.

I for myself am thankful for mbti, it personally helped me to gain much much more understanding about people that I would never have been able to acquire in such short time. Nevertheless, to speak in mbti terms, I have dedicated my Ti now back to what its good for, which is tending the old car so it doesnt break forever and the new insights from mbti will be used in the occasional Fe moments, when you want to "filter data from the world, to see amazing shades of grey that permeate everything and everyone".

I have no clue why I said all this, since everyone went to holidays in the office and my girlfriend got to learn for the exams and we have no budgies, I need to tell that to someone at times :)
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
She is not true to Jung when she refers to a "J or P worldview." Jung didn't even create the J/P. Myers did. Lenore is so busy cramming pop culture into her work, I can't help but wonder if she was beamed up with Captain Kirk and Scotty.
She's obviously dealing with the theory as it has come down through Myers. I never said she rejected MBTI.
And that sounds like the book you're referencing. She seems to have become a bit more Jungian in outlook since writing that, and said she would change things in it if she could.
Lenore is no fan of the inferior, Eric. The woman's approach is paranoid. I can't help but wonder if she thinks the Illuminati are out to get her. Only in this case, the Illuminati is the inferior function. It's "subversive" and it "siphons off," as if to suggest we have a deceitful CIA vampire lurking within us all - sucking our skulls dry, while we sleep. :wink:
I don't know what on earth you're talking about. I have never gathered anything like that from her. She makes it the "troublemaker" in the book, which is thrown off the ship and then begins pulling the ship inland. While that may sound a bit more negative than other people's descriptions; all it is conveying is the rejected role of the inferior in the ego of a person who has not reached maturity yet. And face it, in the older theory (this was before she began to address Beebe's extended model), the inferior was considered "the shadow", and carried a lot of negative connotations.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
Shit, am I a faint case of Borderline Personality Disorder?!


lol, I'm just kidding.
 

Snow Turtle

New member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
1,335
Just to drag up a completelyoff-topic opinion from the main discussion.

Am I the only one that sees benefit in having developed in such a way that my auxillary wasn't capable of handling the situation so instead I relied much on Ti-esqe thinking.
 

Aleksei

Yeah, I can fly.
Joined
Mar 10, 2010
Messages
3,626
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Just to drag up a completelyoff-topic opinion from the main discussion.

Am I the only one that sees benefit in having developed in such a way that my auxillary wasn't capable of handling the situation so instead I relied much on Ti-esqe thinking.
I see it as well (at this point my functions are so well-balanced that my inferior now has the relative strength expected from an auxiliary). It's worth noting though that Sim's theory is that severely imbalanced dom-tertiary loops can cause mental disorders (or possibly be caused by them), not that one necessarily leads to the other.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
Just to drag up a completelyoff-topic opinion from the main discussion.

Am I the only one that sees benefit in having developed in such a way that my auxillary wasn't capable of handling the situation so instead I relied much on Ti-esqe thinking.

It seems this could be very beneficial. The goal may be decided upon by the aux function...but the analysis is done by the tert function.

In each case there are flaws in the dom-tert perception-analysis that have to be gut checked by the aux function....or externally.

But at the same time, by combining the dom-tert functions, you are temporarily creating a whole new way of perceiving-judging the world-which offers information that no other combination of functions CAN provide.

examples:
I see this pattern a lot in ISFJ men...(Not sure if you are a guy or girl :) ) It has helped some of them move into director and VP positions in my company. They "feel" very much like kind ISTJs and seem to be very good mentors. The only weak point is a possible SiTi loop...they are weak in Te logistics, and will choose to ignore new information that doesnt agree with previous Si models. They can also face communication issues with Te doms. The ISFJs are so good at adapting the message so that the auidence feels Fe harmony, thus the Te dom ends up being too obtuse given the softness of the message to catch onto the severity of the problem. SiTi?

I also see it in INFJ men as well and in INFJ women in science. INFJs make great scientists and tech writers for this reason-being able to tap into their tert function for logical analysis. NiTi? Very little Fe needed.

I see ENFPs in strategic marketing, executive management, engineering, physics, and so on. NeTe? an Fi goal, but Te analysis. Or Te developed as an Fi value of logic.

ENTPs who excel in sales, training, marketing, executive management, project management. NeFe? a Ti system but a very authentic Fe.
 
Top