User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 45

  1. #1
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default Jung Functions that shouldn't go together

    I have read that some functions cannot co-exist within the same person to any significant degree, of which I am most interested in:

    Si with Ni
    Se with Ne

    This is despite them operating from almost the same part of the brain, and having some key similarities.

    I am however disatisfied with any explanations read thus far as to why co-use of some functions is not possible, as opposed to merely inefficient.

    So if anyone has an opinion about this, I would like to know:

    a) Why they cannot work well together in the same person, just to give some background. If you can individually address Si/Ni or Se/Ne, rather than just say they contradict each other, that would be marvellous

    b) Could they co-exist to a significant degree, and if not why not. Note that citing a) as evidence will not suffice as an explanation, as this is based on the faulty premise that everyone is well-functioning, with no internal conflicts.

    c) Isn't it worth considering the co-existance of incompatible functions as a possible reason why some people are so hard to type as anything? Note that Isabella Briggs-Myers acknowledges that some people do not develop a clear type.

  2. #2
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,441

    Default

    It's the way the ego is structured. It chooses one dominant function (S, N, T or F) and one dominant orientation (i/e attitude). The others are suppreseed into the unconscious.

    However, it is various complexes within the ego that can reorient the function attitudes. (Which is why the tertiary usually ends up in the dominant attitude).
    The complex associated with the auxiliary keeps it in the opposite attitude from the dominant. That's why you can't have Si and Ni as the preferred functions. One will be preferred, and the other will be associated with a shadow complex, or at least a "left brain alternative" that comes up when the preferred function can't solve the problem.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  3. #3
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Thanks for responding EricB, but this is merely (what you see as) the what, it is not really the why. I accept that actual proof of any of this is sadly unrealistic (and maybe I'll never buy into the theory for this reason), but in the absence of proof some proper rationale is at least required. To put it another way, what do you think would happen if these functions did compete for space in one person, if you were to temporarily suspend your disbelief?

    Does Si find itself dis-anchored and disorientated by becoming aware of another view-point of the same object or situation (thanks to Ni)?
    Does Ni find itself unable to properly see cause-effect patterns and thus project into the future, by having it's perceptions limited by Si?

    I am also presuming that you disagree with Isabella Briggs-Myers about how some people never properly establish a dominant function.

  4. #4
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    WHY DO YOU AUTOMATICALLY PRESUME SI IS LIMITING?

  5. #5
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    WHY DO YOU AUTOMATICALLY PRESUME SI IS LIMITING?
    Ouch!

    I'm just reflecting the way it is described, which is that Si typically interprets things in a singular way, while Ni tends towards multiple interpretations. I wasn't meaning to imply that this necessarily means narrow-minded, which any type can be (Si-doms can be very open-minded) - I didn't mean that they were limited in terms of potential, intelligence etc. I HATE people being horrible to S-types, and might even be one myself!

    Unless anyone is going to give a proper rationale for incompatible functions, I have no choice but to make my own suggestions even whilst acknowledging that they might be rubbish and that I might get some stick for it. I wasn't stating anything as fact, just speculation. I am ignorant (despite reading lots of material) and want to be told something new - educate me!

  6. #6
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Now I've re-read my post, I can understand your anger Marmie Dearest. I'm just an idiot sometimes.

  7. #7
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    I'm not angry. I'm asking you why you would presume that. I'm going to come back and explain this more later, and I said in my rep.

    In the meantime, why don't you compare Si and Ni and Se and Ne in this very helpful link to Jung.

    It's easier for me to tell Si and Ni apart than Se and Ne, personally. I think that may be because I'm a Pe dom.

    The functions are lenses through which one sees the world, preferences almost like "world views." I hate to call them world views though because that's imprecise...it makes people think stupid things like all SFJs are conservative Christians...but by world view I mean that functions aren't just things you switch off to "use" to do various tasks like talking to people or driving a car...they're more holistic than that, more of a way of perceiving and judging all information.

  8. #8
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    my theory is because of this:


    (source: https://springerlink3.metapress.com/...ringerlink.com)
    (picture is head ofc, its pictured from behind)
    a) introverted
    b) extraverted

    and because of the way neurons communicate, they either send a signal or the signal is too weak not to pass at all, its called all or nothing principle:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M1zzT9J_y4

    and there is signals firing ALOT and ALOT of them wont pass further after certain point. some neurons work as inhibitory, which tries to stop other signals and some work as exhibitory, which try to get the signals going further. basically there are thousands of neurons connected to one neuron, both inhibitory and exhibitory, if enough exhibitory signals fire to the neuron(compared to inhibitory signals to same neuron), the signal is passed further. if there isnt enough exhibitory, nothing happens.

    now when you look at the picture, you can see that the messages either go from visual cortex(with introverts) or go to visual cortex(with extraverts).

    and if you think about this all or none principle. some signals coming from visual cortex gets cut off, this is basically taking out the irrelevant out from incoming signal and passes to other regions of brains for further processing.

    and if you look how jung defined what introversion does
    http://www.nyaap.org/jung-lexicon/a/#abstraction
    irrelevant shit of what is perceived gets cut off

    and with extraversion, what is processed before(or whats left from signals after they get cut off) ends up to visual cortex

    and if you look what jung said about extraversion:
    http://www.nyaap.org/jung-lexicon/e/#empathy
    its basically the same thing.
    "The man with the empathetic attitude finds himself . . . in a world that needs his subjective feeling(this isnt feeling function) to give it life and soul. He animates it with himself. [ Ibid., par. 492.]"

    but naturally its not all this simple, but maybe you get some idea out of this. and there isnt any good evidence of what brain parts process which functions, its just all hypothesis. i think its more that functions are certain parts working together in certain ways.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #9
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Thanks for your responses guys.

    I had a while ago skim-read much of the Jung link giving the overview of functions, but decided to print it off/read it properly this time, starting with the bit about introverts, and Si/Ni. I would say it definitely enhanced my understanding, but most interesting was the following statement, talking about both Si/Ni:

    "from an extraverted and rationalistic standpoint, such types are indeed the most fruitless of men"

    Which though merely a point of view (not of Jung himself necessarily), intruiges me because ISxJs are hardly considered "fruitless" in modern society, where they (if anything) tend to be considered very fruitful indeed. I couldn't help but wonder whether the 'ISxJs are all devoted servants' schtick is overdone, and perhaps based on some assumptions that were never even stated by Jung, and I found in this overview nothing that strongly supported such a view. I think the assumption is based on how Si is supposed to develop only in people who value stability and predictability above all else, and find Si the best way of anchoring themselves against a sea of chaos, but why is this actually assumed?

    I still don't see Si and Ni as necessarily mutally exclusive either, based on this material. I suppose it depends on the degree to which you are set in a particular 'world view' as compared to other views, but the goals/concerns attributed to the types (e.g. stability/security, deeper knowledge, personal meaning) certainly are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

  10. #10
    Member Alternatum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    Ixxx
    Enneagram
    6
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmie Dearest View Post
    It's easier for me to tell Si and Ni apart than Se and Ne, personally. I think that may be because I'm a Pe dom.
    I have remembered (not that I'm stalking you - I just remember this sort of thing) that you previously typed as ENFP. In line with your world-view take, do you think you were completely wrong about having an Ne 'world view', or do you just think you have a stronger Se world-view? Could there perhaps be a sliding scale between the two, with you placed a bit more towards one side of the view than the other?

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-08-2011, 10:05 AM
  2. gullibility and sweetness, do they go together?
    By ygolo in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 05-18-2009, 03:20 PM
  3. So which function descriptions do you go with?
    By Ilah in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-06-2008, 09:14 AM
  4. Things that make you go "DOH"
    By Totenkindly in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 02-17-2008, 08:04 PM

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