I have this theory:
- As a child the tertiary is second, the dominant is inverted (e -> i or i -> e).
- The secondary is provided for by the parents, in a way. (Secondary: 'The good parent')
I base this on three observations that people with the following types think they were / used to type themselves (in early youth) as:
for clarification, order below is: type now -> past/retrospected type
ISTJ -> ESFP (forum member -> seen in retrospect)
INFJ -> ENTP (friend -> getting it from MBTI at the time)
INTJ -> ENFP (me -> seen in retrospect)
All three have the pattern:
- the tertiary is secondary (retaining the same orientation)
- the dominant is dominant but has inverted orientation (e/i) - It might be that somehow the situation as a child is conducive to expression of the dominant in its inverted orientation.
I would conceive of a more extreme "child type" as having the tertiary dominating and its orientation inversed (which would yield ENFJ for an INTJ for example).
For the rest it's based on individual recognitions with people, like for example seeing in an ENFJ's movements and posture behaviour I remember from myself from a long time ago.
For the rest, too, it's pretty free theorizing. As I saw the Tertiary Rising thread I thought I would refer to it in my thread title, as that thread is proposing something similar but the other way around (and probably with a little more practical value, or at least future-oriented).