# Thread: Borderline letter = Borderline function?

1. ## Borderline letter = Borderline function?

Hey!

I was wondering, if you're let's say borderline INFP/INTP, will you have equally strong Ti and Fi? But less strong if you were a strong F or T? Or it's impossible?

And btw, is there any other functions test than keys2cognition thingy?

Thanks

2. From what I understand, you couldn't use both judging functions at the same time. I suppose it's possible to be a Fi dom, start off making a decision in that manner, and then clarify/articulate your thoughts in a Ti manner. Or vice versa. I don't notice when/if people are doing that though.

The only other test I know of that somewhat tests for specific functions (although not in an overt way) is the "MMDI" (click the link that says "long test".. the results at the end will show function placement).

3. I definitely feel that I have a good Ti, even if it's weaker than my Fi. I use NeTi all the time and the more I read about Ti, the more I think I use it. It's also why I've come to disagree with the standard order of functions. So in short, yes, I don't know if the classic theories allow for this but it's definitely the case for me.

4. What do you mean by 'strong' here? I like to think of 'strong' as in how strong an influence that function has on your decision-making. So, someone with exactly 50/50 T/F will have an equal preference to T and F.

Imagine having 2 friends giving you advice. 50/50 means you have a 50% chance of listening to any one of them. 60/40 means 60% probability of listening to the first friend, and so on...

Remember though that preference does not equal to skill. You may have a 50/50 preference for T and F but that doesn't mean you're equally good at 'using' them.

5. ^^ i like that explanation.

though it's kind of weird for INFP/INTP to have high Ti/Fi, because even just looking at their first four functions and discarding the rest of supposed function order:

Fi Ne Si Te (INFP)
Ti Ne Si Fe (INTP)

T and F are so low on each other's respective lists that it would be rather surprising to find it, in the opposite attitude no less, almost as high in preference as their dominant. even if we switched Si for Te/Fe it still is only tertiary, which is far from the dominant. and that's not to say it can't happen, just that it's probably rather unlikely - i would be more willing to bet that someone is mistaking Ti for Fi or vice versa than that they are actually using both Ti and Fi strongly. or perhaps even that they're ENP and having a hard time figuring it out because they have a strong tertiary.

speaking of, T/F confusion is not as weird for ENFP/ENTP, because our function order goes

Ne Fi Te Si (ENFP)
Ne Ti Fe Si (ENTP)

so not only are Fi/Ti not dominant, but Te/Fe are our tertiaries, so it's easier to see how we could develop Ti or Fi which is closer to being balanced with our auxiliary (though again i would check and make sure someone is not really just using Te/Fe and mistaking it for Ti/Fi).

by the same token, of course, it's easier to see an INP being near the boundary in N/S, as opposed to T/F. the dominant function usually is so clear to people that, unless they're simply mistaking it for the complementary same-attitude function, it's unlikely to be nearly a true ambivert on it.

of course, all of this is theoretical. i have no idea if actual statistics support it.

oh and here's a test i like - http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/as...velop_old.html. it's too obvious for some people's taste but i think it helps differentiate. the submit link is broken though - just go through and count up your tick marks.

6. I had some thought before that functions balanced each other, something like

If you got 98% Ti you got 2% Fi.
Same if with all the other pairs.

This makes the shadow theory useless though.

7. Shadow theory isn't about relative strengths of the functions, it's about complexes associated with the functions, that are either conscious or less conscious.

8. Originally Posted by Eric B
Shadow theory isn't about relative strengths of the functions, it's about complexes associated with the functions, that are either conscious or less conscious.
Yeah, but isnt functions a fixed state of mind, not something fluid if the limits are so clear?

What I was thinking is that they are blended to a degree.

Which I dont think would be possible if they where fixed.

9. I believe even functions have fluidity to them. They're perspectives, not hard, solid things as we often fall into speaking of them as.

10. I tend to fall in between NiFe and NiTe, but in most situations, I cannot "use" Te and Fe at the same time. If I am interacting with a close friend of mine, I will end up naturally using Fe more than Te. In a science lab, however, I will end up switching gears to Te mode.

#### Posting Permissions

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