Underdeveloped or Inferior?

[ReflecTcelfeR]

When is a function actually inferior in the set of four? And when is it considered 'underdeveloped'?

 

[rav3n]

Disclaimer: Inexpert opinion.

Assuming stacking is a valid hypothesis, the assumption is that types lean towards a stacking order of preferential processes. If you were to take 4000 ENTPs, most would have difficulty with their Si process by using it less effectively than an Si-dom.

An underdeveloped or overdeveloped process might mean that while 4000 ENTPs use Ne naturally and effectively, there might be some who've had other factors like environmental ones, impact on their natural usage of Ne to the degree that they don't trust it, so they suppress it or are always double checking their Ne.

As it affects one ENTJ for underdeveloping or overdeveloping, my SE is quite high due to growing up in a large family who were dominating MBTI sensors.

 

[Andy]

When is a function actually inferior in the set of four? And when is it considered 'underdeveloped'?

It's inferior when it is number 4, the opposite of the primary. Don't get too bound up in the name though, the inferior can be very significant. To be function development is a comment on what you actually see in the real world. If the opperation of a function leads to a state that is psychologically unhealthy/weak, than that function is undeveloped. Being undeveloped does not change the fundamental nature of the function, only the way it is expressed.

 

[sculpting]

As it affects one ENTJ for underdeveloping or overdeveloping, my SE is quite high due to growing up in a large family who were dominating MBTI sensors.

MBTI mentions two types of underdevelopment:

1. Under development of the aux function and over development of the tert function. (From what I have observed this seems especially problematic when the inferior function is also poorly developed.)

2. Underdevelopment of the primary function and overdevelopment of the aux.

I havent seen this second version in real life. However-I dont watch many Doms who lead with a judging function-perhaps it is more evident in those populations?

For instance I could imagine a little Te dom being a fairly bull headed creature-but if raised in a family that forced them to conceal those decisive tendencies-perhaps they would underdevlop Te thus allowing it to be used more immaturely? Combined with the possibility that our ego seems to primarily reside in in the more subjective introverted functions, it would point to this pattern of underdevelopment being most common in Fe or Te doms.

 

[KDude]

It's inferior when it is number 4, the opposite of the primary. Don't get too bound up in the name though, the inferior can be very significant. To be function development is a comment on what you actually see in the real world. If the opperation of a function leads to a state that is psychologically unhealthy/weak, than that function is undeveloped. Being undeveloped does not change the fundamental nature of the function, only the way it is expressed.

I think I'm more introverted than usual, and find it hard to not to see both forms of extroverted judgement as my "inferior".

 

[rav3n]

MBTI mentions two types of underdevelopment:

1. Under development of the aux function and over development of the tert function. (From what I have observed this seems especially problematic when the inferior function is also poorly developed.)

2. Underdevelopment of the primary function and overdevelopment of the aux.

I havent seen this second version in real life. However-I dont watch many Doms who lead with a judging function-perhaps it is more evident in those populations?

For instance I could imagine a little Te dom being a fairly bull headed creature-but if raised in a family that forced them to conceal those decisive tendencies-perhaps they would underdevlop Te thus allowing it to be used more immaturely? Combined with the possibility that our ego seems to primarily reside in in the more subjective introverted functions, it would point to this pattern of underdevelopment being most common in Fe or Te doms.

Any of this is possible although my aux is pretty high too. Net result, through the roof Te and Ti with a gap to Ni and Ne with not much of a gap to SE but some distance to Si. Fi and Fe are both relatively insignificant, particularly Fe.

And in all honesty, it's a relief living in the sensory present to some degree. Spent my life future planning with goal posts set that were met and then discarded. Time for some now and me until I finally find something worth pouring passion into. Then get the hell outta' my way 'cause I'll just drive over anything that gets in my way.

 

[Falcon]

The inferior function is the complementary function to your dominant (the other side of the coin) that you repress subconsciously in order to allow your dominant function to be conscious.

 

[sculpting]

It's inferior when it is number 4, the opposite of the primary. Don't get too bound up in the name though, the inferior can be very significant. To be function development is a comment on what you actually see in the real world. If the opperation of a function leads to a state that is psychologically unhealthy/weak, than that function is undeveloped. Being undeveloped does not change the fundamental nature of the function, only the way it is expressed.

Actually I missed this last sentence the first time through. When I took my MBTI class the way the instructor described functional development was that to develop a function you actually have to use the function....if you dont use it it doesnt develop.

I took this to mean that functions dont simply become more expressed...but more...develop resolution and precision in how they are used. By using them you learn the mistakes they make and what to watch out for. Sophistication in usage. You learn to monitor them over time and you store collections of information about the results of using the function. But if you never use it....well it seems the base blueprint may be there...but when you use it you will be like a little kid using the function as you lack a usage history...

This isnt to say we dont, um, exhibit, microusage of functions that are not ours-like Ne doms maybe using a bit of Ni to fill in gaps and so on....

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Hm, thanks everyone. I'm still a little confused. The under usage of a particular function would mean that is underdeveloped because of the lack of sophisticated use, but doesn't that lead to what the inferior may be. If it is suppressed in your subconscious, or not regularly used it would make it underdeveloped. I guess I don't see the difference between underdeveloped and inferior... It might be more that you could use the inferior function as much as the superior, but only use it towards certain circumstances? I mean to say that you don't attack a problem with it, however it is still used as often as the superior. So the function is inferior only as much as you use it, not it's actual processing power or range of usage.

I think this might also resolve my issue between insecurity of using the inferior function, because it doesn't mean the function is poor, just not how I immediatly solve a solution when it's introduced to me.

 

[Andy]

I think I'm more introverted than usual, and find it hard to not to see both forms of extroverted judgement as my "inferior".

Not that surprising. The 5th is the weakest of the shadow functions. Thus the 4th and 5th can both be problematic. One of the obstacles is the poor differentiation of the two, which is to say the inferior and opposing functions aren't entirely seperated in the persons mind. The conciouse inferior is the one that is most pleasurable or rewarding, where as the shadow is a less satisfying mindset. However, the inferior is so foriegn to the primary, that the person often shyies away from it when it attitude is needed and they slip into the seemingly more palitable opposing function instead. Unfortunately, the shadow is no fun, so they quickly become tired of it and seek to return to doing things more in accord with the primary. The poor differentiation means they struggle to tell the two appart and both get written off as a bad job.

Actually I missed this last sentence the first time through. When I took my MBTI class the way the instructor described functional development was that to develop a function you actually have to use the function....if you dont use it it doesnt develop.

I took this to mean that functions dont simply become more expressed...but more...develop resolution and precision in how they are used. By using them you learn the mistakes they make and what to watch out for. Sophistication in usage. You learn to monitor them over time and you store collections of information about the results of using the function. But if you never use it....well it seems the base blueprint may be there...but when you use it you will be like a little kid using the function as you lack a usage history...

This isnt to say we dont, um, exhibit, microusage of functions that are not ours-like Ne doms maybe using a bit of Ni to fill in gaps and so on....

Yeah, an MBTI teacher probably would explain things this way, which is one of the reasons I don't think much of it. For a function to be improved by use in this manner they would have to be skill sets or abilities, and if they are then MBTI is attempting to capabilities to people according to a rigid, preset scheme. My own observation of the world suggests that method wont get far. Life often forces people to develop skills they have little personal interest in, apart from the fact that they have to use them. This leads to people developing skills out of order, which makes you wonder what the order is supposed to be about anyway. If the order goes, what are you left with except a bunch of words that describe different abilities, rather like the seven intelligences theory but not as concise. The whole idea of type goes out the window as anything very meaningful.

However, the problem can be resolved by simply changing the way you view functions. I call them motivations, Eric calls them perspectives, but either way they are representative how we decide what we want out of life, rather than how we go about getting it. So if an INFP has to learn accountancy as part of thier job, it has no bearing on the function order. It hasn't intrinsically changed what they want out of life, though they may now have a new way getting it.

Of course, you can't practice a motivation/perspective per se, but you can grow more familiar with them - which is about as close to training a function as you can get. Essentially, developing the lower order functions is process of learning that their is more to get out of the world than you at first thought.

Hm, thanks everyone. I'm still a little confused. The under usage of a particular function would mean that is underdeveloped because of the lack of sophisticated use, but doesn't that lead to what the inferior may be. If it is suppressed in your subconscious, or not regularly used it would make it underdeveloped. I guess I don't see the difference between underdeveloped and inferior... It might be more that you could use the inferior function as much as the superior, but only use it towards certain circumstances? I mean to say that you don't attack a problem with it, however it is still used as often as the superior. So the function is inferior only as much as you use it, not it's actual processing power or range of usage.

I think this might also resolve my issue between insecurity of using the inferior function, because it doesn't mean the function is poor, just not how I immediatly solve a solution when it's introduced to me.

As I mentioned, I regard the functions as motivations, and the inferior as being a motivation that is often suppressed by the attitude of the inferior. That has bearing on how it is expressed, because it represents something that a small part of you wants to engagge in, even if the bulk either want admit it, or just fails to see it. You may have heard the inferior being described as erratic or uncontroled. When you look at it like this, you can see why - it's a desire that doesn't get fed, so it will build up over time until it becomes strong enough to break through the suppression of the primary and be expressed. Unfortunately, the pessure build up means it does so in a sudden splurge like someone standing on a tube of tooth paste. It then goes back to being ignored again... That sort of thing goes on until the person recognises the desire is there and starts to express it in a more controled way. Of course, the confusion with the opposing function makes this harder.

 

[Such Irony]

Not that surprising. The 5th is the weakest of the shadow functions. Thus the 4th and 5th can both be problematic. One of the obstacles is the poor differentiation of the two, which is to say the inferior and opposing functions aren't entirely seperated in the persons mind. The conciouse inferior is the one that is most pleasurable or rewarding, where as the shadow is a less satisfying mindset. However, the inferior is so foriegn to the primary, that the person often shyies away from it when it attitude is needed and they slip into the seemingly more palitable opposing function instead. Unfortunately, the shadow is no fun, so they quickly become tired of it and seek to return to doing things more in accord with the primary. The poor differentiation means they struggle to tell the two appart and both get written off as a bad job.

In my case, I think I have reasonably good Te, I just tend to disregard it in favor of dominant Ti. I think Te is probably the strongest of my four shadow functions. I'd say that for me, the weakest of the shadow functions is Se. I know that for INTPs that's the 7th function. I always thought the weakest function is supposedly the demonic or the 8th function, which I never fully understood either because I have reasonably good Fi as well.

 

[Andy]

In my case, I think I have reasonably good Te, I just tend to disregard it in favor of dominant Ti. I think Te is probably the strongest of my four shadow functions. I'd say that for me, the weakest of the shadow functions is Se. I know that for INTPs that's the 7th function. I always thought the weakest function is supposedly the demonic or the 8th function, which I never fully understood either because I have reasonably good Fi as well.

How do you define Te? I don't mean to sound rude, but I ask because a lot of people think of it as organising stuff, categorising or sometimes thinking fast. I wouldn't have said any of those definitions are correct. Actually, while we are on the question, how do you define Ti?

 

[Eric B]

In my case, I think I have reasonably good Te, I just tend to disregard it in favor of dominant Ti. I think Te is probably the strongest of my four shadow functions. I'd say that for me, the weakest of the shadow functions is Se. I know that for INTPs that's the 7th function. I always thought the weakest function is supposedly the demonic or the 8th function, which I never fully understood either because I have reasonably good Fi as well.

The order has nothing to do with strength at all. So #8 doesn't have to be weakest, and it seems it hardly ever is. It can even be somewhat strong, from being the dominant's same-side brain alternative. the 5th function might also be strong, simply from being the opposite attitude "backup" of the dominant.
The weakest is often 6,7, and in many people is even 3,4!

 

[Andy]

The order has nothing to do with strength at all. So #8 doesn't have to be weakest, and it seems it hardly ever is. It can even be somewhat strong, from being the dominant's same-side brain alternative. the 5th function might also be strong, simply from being the opposite attitude "backup" of the dominant.
The weakest is often 6,7, and in many people is even 3,4!

Interesting. I think it's worth noting that I think we are not using strength to mean the same thing at this point. To me, the strength of function is almost a statistical statement about how likely a function is to be expressed in a healthy way, rather than being about how often a function is expressed or if it's actually expression is healthy in a given individual. Frequency of expression I usually refer to as function preference, and health of expression as function development, so a developing function is one what is changing from an unhealthy expression to a healthy one.

The way I use the words, function order and strength are invariant for all members of a type, but function preference and development can vary significantly. Thus, when I say a function is weak, I mean it is hard to express in a health fashion, a bit like saying running up hill is harder than running on the level, but some people can still do it well.

Of course, it is still possible to argue about the strength of the different positions in the order, but that's a different point.