User Tag List

First 891011 Last

Results 91 to 100 of 108

  1. #91
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    the standard model doesent include this tertiary temptation thing, its an theory added later by someone. imo the standard model would be jungs model, since thats where all of those things originate.
    By "standard", I meant the one most people here use - let's call it Myers' model. There is no standard model, as such. If you are using Jung's, the tertiary is extroverted in nature (or some would say, it doesn't have a specific attitude).

    INTP function orders under various schemes:

    Myers
    Ti/Ne/Si/Fe

    Jung
    Ti/Ne/S[e]/Fe

    Beebe/Berens
    Ti/Ne/Si/Fe/Te/Ni/Se/Fi

    Thomson
    Ti/Ne/Fi/Se/Ni/Te/Si/Fe

    You have to state which scheme you are using for "tertiary" to mean anything as the order differs in each. For example, if you are talking about Thomson, I agree Fi is the way to develop the feeling function for INTPs and to reduce the potency of the inferior. If you are talking about Jung, Se is definitely a great stress-reliever for me, plus it pulls me out of myself to engage with the world on its terms, rather than mine, which is exactly what I need. But if you are talking about Beebe, (as you appear to be by stating the tertiary attitude mirrors the dom, despite also claiming Beebe is wrong...), then no, Si doesn't help develop a more rounded personality for INTPs and I don't know anyone who subscribes to this view.

    The quote you used is misapplied. It doesn't refer to the tertiary function but to a "third way" in conflict resolution. This third way is more likely to be mediated by the auxiliary function (dom=thesis, inf=antithesis, aux=synthesis) than anything else (in Jung's thought too - as indicated by my previous quote.)
    Quote Originally Posted by Urarienev View Post
    Hmm. I think I have tried it (using Fi conciously). Do you just not like using Fe? Cause I think I like using Fi when I think about it, and I have sometimes felt better using it. Am I misunderstanding something?
    Thats not for me to say, but if you are an ENTJ you are not a typical one.
    It's not that I don't like using it - it's that I can't use it. If anything, IT uses me. Or it used to, before I became conscious of it. Now I just recognise what's going on and get over it.

    The way I understand MBTI is that the forth function in your case Fe, in mine Fi, would be the Aspirational Function. The function that "Drives" us. Where we have all of our inner desires.
    You too are mixing your models / theories up. One of the reasons it's difficult to have a conversation about this stuff is because no one can agree on what goes where. But in my view, it doesn't make sense to claim all of your inner desires are invested in your least used function (unless there's something very wrong with you, and type doesn't cover pathology). The inferior is the part that feels *least* like you (which is why it gets projected).

    Sense of purpose...is what I get from this. Yes we have a leading role but I kinda think that we are really directed by our inferior. Almost like everyother function is "serving" it.
    If you are ENFP, then your association with Fi makes sense, because it's your aux, not your inf.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  2. #92
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    By "standard", I meant the one most people here use - let's call it Myers' model. There is no standard model, as such. If you are using Jung's, the tertiary is extroverted in nature (or some would say, it doesn't have a specific attitude).

    INTP function orders under various schemes:

    Myers
    Ti/Ne/Si/Fe

    Jung
    Ti/Ne/S[e]/Fe

    Beebe/Berens
    Ti/Ne/Si/Fe/Te/Ni/Se/Fi

    Thomson
    Ti/Ne/Fi/Se/Ni/Te/Si/Fe

    You have to state which scheme you are using for "tertiary" to mean anything as the order differs in each. For example, if you are talking about Thomson, I agree Fi is the way to develop the feeling function for INTPs and to reduce the potency of the inferior. If you are talking about Jung, Se is definitely a great stress-reliever for me, plus it pulls me out of myself to engage with the world on its terms, rather than mine, which is exactly what I need. But if you are talking about Beebe, (as you appear to be by stating the tertiary attitude mirrors the dom, despite also claiming Beebe is wrong...), then no, Si doesn't help develop a more rounded personality for INTPs and I don't know anyone who subscribes to this view.

    The quote you used is misapplied. It doesn't refer to the tertiary function but to a "third way" in conflict resolution. This third way is more likely to be mediated by the auxiliary function (dom=thesis, inf=antithesis, aux=synthesis) than anything else (in Jung's thought too - as indicated by my previous quote.)
    actually isabel myers briggs and katharine myers both thought that jung was saying that tert is in opposite attitude to dom, so what MBTI actually says that INTPs tert is Se, not Si. this is pretty common misconception about MBTI. but there are some authors in MBTI community who see tert being in same attitude as dom, for some reason this opinion has gained more popularity over internetbeings than what MBTI originally said.

    from article 'Isabel Briggs Myers and type development' by Katharine Myers:



    when it comes to jung, he isnt being too clear about the orientation of tert and there are multiple views on what jung meant, the MBTI view where tert is opposite to dom, the view where aux and tert has no orientation their own, the most common view where tert is same attitude to dom, the view where aux and tert has no orientation without being differentiated and them being able to be differentiated to either E or I, regardless of what dom is, view where dom and aux are in same attitude and tert and inferior are the opposite, the view where tert fluctuates between attitudes. usually when jungians talk about typology, they often make no reference to orientation of tert of aux, for example INTP is introverted thinking with intuition(not extraverted or introverted intuition).

    also lenores model doesent say that INTP has Fi tert, she says that dom is Ti, aux Ne, tert Si and inferior Fe and refers to Fi and Se as right-brain alternatives(crows nest functions) and Ni and Te as left-brain alternatives(double agents).

    this kinda eliminates your thought about my relation to beebes model, as its just one of many who assign I as tert to introvert types.

    also when it comes to developing Si in my personal experiences, realizing the introverted attitude of my S was what allowed me to develop my Fe more. it was the realization of the subjectivity in my sense perceptions that allowed me to re-examine my views towards Ti and basically debunk shit loads of stuff that i had previously thought as simple objective facts and because i thought that they were objective facts, instead of subjective impressions of sensations i couldnt understand what the heck my Fe was doing and actually thought that it was Fi doing that stuff, when it was in reality just Fe guiding my introverted thinking. realizing this i could see more clearly how Fe was guiding my Ti and start guiding my Fe in more conscious ways. also i should mention that the realization about Si, i.e differentiation of it was instantly followed by realization of the correct path towards differentiating Fe as well.

    you cant seriously think that the realization(for young INTP) about the subjectivity of his formerly thought "facts" wouldnt make an INTP more well rounded person. imo this realization is crucial in the development of INTP, as it kinda makes the INTP be more aware of the possibility that his logic might not the the ultimate truth of things, but just an theory of things that at least seemingly follows logic. also if an INTP realizes this, it will force him to do more comparison of his ideas to external world before accepting them as very very plausible theories(some might say facts, but i dont really like the word as it refers to something proven and nothing can be proven with 100% accuracy, because i can give counterargument for that by saying that you might be living in a matrix type of world and you would need to prove that and everything no matter how silly things i come up with in order to give 100% proof of the theory, and well, you cant really prove whether you live in matrix or not).

    this jung quote that you talk about i assume is this "In order to cushion the impact of the unconscious, an irrational type needs a stronger development of the rational auxiliary function present in consciousness (and vice versa)."

    actually this doesent debunk what i just said, you see jung saw both 2nd and 3rd functions as aux. also i dont disagree about the importance to developing 2nd function also in the individuation process. the general consensus is that you first develop dom, then aux, then tert, then inferior and trying to develop inferior straight away will only cause too much confusion for ego and that you need the auxiliary functions(2nd and 3rd) to "soften the blow".

    when it comes to the quote i gave, this idea of tertium non datur applies to all conflicts between opposites of conscious and unconscious in jungs model of the psyche. you see the conflict between opposites is between ego and unconscious, dominant function is guided by the ego and it represses its opposite(inferior) to unconscious. by the principle of compensation, the inferior is pushed from the unconscious, but is repressed by the ego, so they need some mediator between the two in order to get over the repression of inferior.

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.nyaap.org/jung-lexicon/o
    Opposites
    Psychologically, the ego and the unconscious. (See also compensation, conflict, progression and transcendent function.)


    Whatever attitude exists in the conscious mind, and whichever psychological function is dominant, the opposite is in the unconscious. This situation seldom precipitates a crisis in the first half of life. But for older people who reach an impasse, characterized by a one-sided conscious attitude and the blockage of energy, it is necessary to bring to light psychic contents that have been repressed.

    The repressed content must be made conscious so as to produce a tension of opposites, without which no forward movement is possible. The conscious mind is on top, the shadow underneath, and just as high always longs for low and hot for cold, so all consciousness, perhaps without being aware of it, seeks its unconscious opposite, lacking which it is doomed to stagnation, congestion, and ossification. Life is born only of the spark of opposites.["The Problem of the Attitude-Type," CW 7, par. 78.]

    This in turn activates the process of compensation, which leads to an irrational “third,” the transcendent function.

    Out of [the] collision of opposites the unconscious psyche always creates a third thing of an irrational nature, which the conscious mind neither expects nor understands. It presents itself in a form that is neither a straight “yes” nor a straight “no.”["The Psychology of the Child Archetype," CW 9i, par. 285."The Psychology of the Child Archetype," CW 9i, par. 285.]

    Jung explained the potential renewal of the personality in terms of the principle of entropy in physics, according to which transformations of energy in a relatively closed system take place, and are only possible, as a result of differences in intensity.

    Psychologically, we can see this process at work in the development of a lasting and relatively unchanging attitude. After violent oscillations at the beginning the opposites equalize one another, and gradually a new attitude develops, the final stability of which is the greater in proportion to the magnitude of the initial differences. The greater the tension between the pairs of opposites, the greater will be the energy that comes from them . . . [and] the less chance is there of subsequent disturbances which might arise from friction with material not previously constellated.["On Psychic Energy," CW 8, par. 49.]

    Some degree of tension between consciousness and the unconsciousness is both unavoidable and necessary. The aim of analysis is therefore not to eliminate the tension but rather to understand the role it plays in the self-regulation of the psyche. Moreover, the assimilation of unconscious contents results in the ego becoming responsible for what was previously unconscious. There is thus no question of anyone ever being completely at peace.
    you should note that this "third" is something that conscious mind does not really understand, nor expect, aux more often than not(and especially when trying to differentiate the inferior) is something that the conscious mind understands and tries to use.

    then there is this thing called transcendent function(which comes out of tertium non datur), which is not a single function, but an combination of functions used together. there isnt any info about which functions are used there, but from personal experience and from following jungs model of the psyche its the tert/inferior working together, in somewhat similar fashion that dom Ti and aux Ne create intuitive thinking, you see intuitive thinking(or intuition and thinking separately) is something that INTP quite naturally understands as it is his ego point of view, however sensing feeling is something that INTP does not expect, not understand very well, at least before some level of differentiation being made first on the two.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  3. #93
    Unapologetic being Evolving Transparency's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    1w9 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ESI Fi
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    The quote you used is misapplied. It doesn't refer to the tertiary function but to a "third way" in conflict resolution. This third way is more likely to be mediated by the auxiliary function (dom=thesis, inf=antithesis, aux=synthesis) than anything else (in Jung's thought too - as indicated by my previous quote.)
    Thats not for me to say, but if you are an ENTJ you are not a typical one.
    It's not that I don't like using it - it's that I can't use it. If anything, IT uses me. Or it used to, before I became conscious of it. Now I just recognise what's going on and get over it.

    You too are mixing your models / theories up. One of the reasons it's difficult to have a conversation about this stuff is because no one can agree on what goes where. But in my view, it doesn't make sense to claim all of your inner desires are invested in your least used function (unless there's something very wrong with you, and type doesn't cover pathology). The inferior is the part that feels *least* like you (which is why it gets projected).



    If you are ENFP, then your association with Fi makes sense, because it's your aux, not your inf.
    So this was what I was trying to get to.

    I just believe that the order goes a certain way - I mix this theory with the "roles" or of the functions with the "lasagna". And you don't that's all. I now see why we don't always agree. I don't have my models mixed up. I like BOTH models...

    The Leading Role (Dominant)Te
    The Supporting Role (Auxiliary)Ni
    The Relief Role (Tertiary)Se
    The Aspirational Role (Inferior)Fi
    The Opposing RoleTi
    The Critical Parent Role Ne
    The Deceiving Role Si
    The Devilish Role Fe


    With the lasagna

    Dom
    Devil
    Relief and so on.


    So for me it makes sense to label each function with a "job description"

    Then if you apply the lasagna to it...it works the same way ... Lenore says I use Fe when stressed or when Te doesn't serve me anymore. Just like INTP's use Fi<---also known as the "the devil comes out in people" <--or the bad side of people...

    This is how I see it. I definately know my Fi is behind all of my desicions. But I primarily use Te.

    I cannot be an ENFP...I'm a judger...hardcore. I am not like most ENTJ's you're right.

    If you have a way to maybe fill in some gaps to my point of view go right ahead. But I'm not really looking for negative feedback here...because I like my meshing of theories and I know I'll take what you say personally if you don't think mine's right...I'm just not ready lol.

    Do you go by any particular model more than another?
    "Once the game is over, the Pawn and the King go back into the same box"

    Freedom isn't free.
    "Freedom is the right to tell people what they do not want to hear." ~ Orwell
    I'm that person that embodies pretty much everything that you hate. Might as well get used to it.
    Unapologetically bonding in an uninhibited, propelled manner
    10w12

  4. #94
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Let's see if I've caught up. ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    The nature of the inferior is hardly minutiae. It's at the heart of most of the problems of each "type". If you think the notion of "type" has any validity at all, you must address the consequences of unbalanced development that are implied within it. The inferior function is the means to do so. It's hard to imagine anything of greater consequence in typology...

    In fact, I have wondered if type emerges as a result of the inferior deficit - I.e. this is the seed around which the personality crystallises. So that the dominant function emerges as a defence against the pre-existence of the inferior-ity (rather than the inferior being a consequence of one function's 'natural' dominance).
    I'm mostly in agreement.

    The inferior itself isn't minutiae at all, and if the model has merit, the inferior is important for exactly the reasons you say. From a practical standpoint (which is, personally, the standpoint that I tend to value), recognizing what it is that we hide from or repress is extremely important. It's akin to the Enneagram, where we have a set of self-images that protect us from some core. I like that 'inferior deficit' idea; it's intriguing and it's worth fleshing out.

    The minutia--the parts that make me want to stab myself in the throat--come in our typical approach to studying this stuff. I believe that we put the cart before the horse when we try to ascribe little behavioral details to, say, the inferior function. We have a hard enough time truly understanding the parts of cognition that are most manifest; I think that we ought to refine and further validate our models of those first, because that will give us promise for modeling the rest of our psyche satisfactorily.

    It is reconciled by the i.
    Jung (and followers) use "rational" to imply "subject to conscious control" and operating according to a predictable logic. It follows that whatever is not under conscious control / acting in harmony with conscious goals is not rational.
    (He considered Sensing and Intuition to be "irrational" functions).
    So it's a simple name clash, two different uses of the word "rational." Got it. That solves the problem quite nicely.

    In their manifestation.
    I can't discount others' experiences and states of mind, but I do wonder whether we're ascribing the right causes to them.

    I've personally looked at the descriptions for manifestations of inferior Ti, Se, and Si (those that would theoretically most apply to me) from "Was It Really Me?" and from a few websites. They seem to be very lazily built upon what such-and-such a type would theoretically look like under stress, and I can't force any of those three to resonate with me at all.

    But I actually found this thing to be a decent resource. It's nice and simple, and it forms explanations 'from the real world inward' instead of 'from the theory outward'--which I personally find to be refreshing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    I'm not sure why you keep changing your type. Are you certain you're Fe-Dom?
    In-joke, mostly.

    edit: Also, from below:
    Quote Originally Posted by Z Buck McFate View Post
    ^ *cough*
    this.

    One of the reasons it's difficult to have a conversation about this stuff is because no one can agree on what goes where.
    This. This needs to be shouted from the rooftops over and over again. We conflate our models and terminology to the point that nobody actually knows what anyone else is talking about, which murks up discussion hardcore.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wind-Up Rex View Post
    I'm intrigued by your perspective here because it seems to be an easy resolution to the problem. It streamlines everything, which is always sexy. And in some ways I feel there is truth to what you've written here. For me, Fi confers a certain rightness to the vision of Ni. But I feel that to stop at such a superficial understanding of the inferior isn't particularly satisfactory because it lacks a certain dynamic tension, and is likely to just cause personal stagnation as a result. Growth requires recognition of an imbalance.
    I love me some streamlining. And I love me some certainty, too. And I love useful, simple concepts (but, of course, I don't mind delving into the details to the extent that they're relevant, useful, or valid).

    What I wrote can be considered one 'model' of stress/emotion. It's very simple, of course. I can see where it could stand to have some more fidelity thrown in. .. just not.. you know, at the level of "My inferior Te causes me to organize my closets once in a while."
    Last edited by garbage; 11-17-2012 at 01:29 PM.

  5. #95
    darkened dreams labyrinthine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    isfp
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Posts
    8,595

    Default

    This may not be entirely in MBTI terms, but I find a deep sense of happiness and balance when I sit alone in nature and experience every one of my senses, but integrate it into a deeper meaning. I notice the connectedness between everything I experience and feel a deep connection to nature. I think this is Se being integrated into my Ni.

    There is an aspect of the arts which integrates everything as well, in which the senses express deeper meaning.
    Step into my metaphysical room of mirrors.
    Fear of reality creates myopic morality
    So I guess it means there is trouble until the robins come
    (from Blue Velvet)

  6. #96
    can't handcuff the wind Z Buck McFate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    3,692

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    To integrate the inferior is to come to terms with the tertiary? Which you do by communing more with the auxiliary? The inferior comes along for the ride whenever you're, um, auxiliarating, so....
    Ha. Auxiliarate.


    1. (verb) to use one’s auxiliary function. “I am totally auxiliarating right now.”
    2. (noun) a classification of one’s awareness of one’s subjective cognitive processes. “I give Kalach an auxiliarating of 8.5 (out of 10).”


    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    No. I'm not "shitting you". I don't really understand the aggression, tbh.
    Withdrawing unilaterally from a conversation is an exercise of control, whether you like it or not. I didn't say it wasn't a legitimate option.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    How can you know what the motivation is? How can you know that you're not just shutting down and refusing to see something from another perspective? Isn't that a more forceful exercise of control?
    I suppose using the word “forceful” implied to me something other than ‘legitimate choice’. The notion that withdrawing from relentless anti-dialogical interaction could be described as “forceful exercise of control” seems odd to me- like it implies (imo) the act of drawing boundaries for oneself should somehow require consent of the other person (that without that consent, it’s ‘force’). But then I find it puzzling that you’d find “Are you shitting me?” to be aggressive. It was intended more to express surprise. So .

    I take it you disagree. It doesn't really matter - you don't know me.
    I have that reaction pretty much anytime someone insists they know what their own pitfalls are. I said it’s available to believe about ourselves to point out that it’s a bold claim and to point out that asserting it doesn’t make it true. I can’t help but suspect, if an INFJ were to say that INFJs have an “unparalled ability to cut through all the extraneous crap and get to the heart of a problem”….you’d have your own opinions about it. But I agree- whether or not it’s true shouldn’t matter to me, and whether or not I agree with it shouldn’t matter to you.

    It's just that you're wrong if you think it has anything to do with inferior function expression (the subject of this thread.) I know this because I know exactly what it's like to have a confrontation with my inferior, and I've also read other INTPs expressing similar experiences. There are common themes. And "tunnel vision" is not amongst them. If anything, we lose our usual clarity of thought, precision, and capacity for intense focus. It feels a bit like your brain has been scrambled. It becomes impossible to concentrate. You are incapable of making a rational decision. It's frightening, horrifying, even. Tunnel vision would be a God-send compared to iFe.
    It seems like claiming it was the equivalent of tunnel vision was a bad choice of expression, it’s more like having blinders on. And even that will probably be met with contention. This frustration I’m talking about- it’s like talking to a kite that thinks it’s still attached to the ground even though the string clearly broke. That ‘string’ is what’s clear to introverted perceivers (even though it’s exactly what causes our tunnel vision- and fyi that tunnel vision doesn’t give the stability it appears to when it’s based on unconscious impulses, secure stability comes from the experience of actually being on the same page with other people). The problem with NTPs- and it isn’t only to me, there’s a distinct behavior I’ve seen and discussed with others enough to know it’s a thing, and it’s there as sure as there’s an issue which presents specific to NFJ and there’s an issue specific to NTJ- is there’s a shiftyness that flits from one convenient ‘truth’ to another to suit one’s immediate argument/needs/wants. They can be relentlessly pushy with it, picking and choosing details which support their view (and THAT’S what I’m referring to as the tunnel vision) and completely oblivious to how the string (which attaches it to shared reality) has clearly broken. It can be just as astounding to deal with and as anti-dialogical as when Js get dogmatic.

    I’m not trying to invalidate your experience by simply insisting this tendency exists. I’ve already stated it’s more the exception than the rule. Most INTPs I’ve dealt with- if they do it at all, they do it on a miniscule level and it doesn’t significantly impair communication…..it looks more like a temporary hiccup most of the time (and that’s exactly how I’d describe the NFJ thing in me, merely something I trip over sometimes). But I’ve heard enough venting from people to know it’s there and it’s not just me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Salomé View Post
    You cannot know what it feels like from the inside. No matter how good you think your empathic skills are, you're kidding yourself. All you can be sure of is what it looks like to you. Anything else is sheer hubris. Why I keep coming back to this being some kind of projection, is because whenever people express a dogmatic opinion about your internal state that bears no relation to reality whatsoever, it usually is projection. Projection is, after all, the way we understand anything at all about what it is like to be human. The only way we can.
    This is a good point and I often arrive at this possibility myself, though I do try to make sure I’ve exhausted ways in which what’s being said ‘bears no relation to reality whatsoever’. Sometimes it simply ‘bears no relation’ to my ego; it’s easy and common to mistake “bears no relation to what I want reality to be” for “bears no relation to reality”.

    Another problem here is that I forget to do some version of what Kalach does when he ends his post with “/might not be true”. I’ve been arguing some theoretical formula of functions to speculate on some kind of ‘why’ which could very possibly be wrong. I take for granted that’s understood- I’m not in a lecture hall here coming from a place of assumed authority; I’m in a forum having a conversation with others on a level playing field. I don’t even know that my theory about NFJs or NTJs is ‘accurate’ either, as far as “it happens specifically because blah blah inferior blah Ti/Fi blah blah”- only that the behavior consistently presents amongst the types. It’s all just an exercise in defining some abstract concepts about *stuff* that happens in our heads. ‘Function theory’ give us terms to use to talk about abstract concepts but half the time I’m not even confident people in discussions here have similar understandings of what each function is. I take for granted that it also seems to others like the whole purpose of participating here is to bounce our understanding off others to better refine it. And as if it isn’t hard enough to define, ego attachments interfere left and right, so (to me) it should all be taken with a grain of salt. I forget to always explicitly add that disclaimer.

    The underlying behavior is what I was trying to describe though. I absolutely can’t claim to know with certainty ‘why’ it happens and no one can claim to know what someone else’s experience is as well as their own…..but I can claim the behavior pattern happens because I’ve been around it. And because it’s so impulsive (which shows externally in how immediate and irrational it is), I do think it pertains to this thread in that it seems largely ruled by unconscious impulses.

    Which is why my reply to you was not that we don't do many of the things that piss you off, just that the fact they piss you off, in itself, is nothing to condemn them for, nor a reason to judge them "inferior"...
    While I have mentioned several times now that what I’m talking about doesn’t apply to every single NTP, that it’s more the exception than the rule, made clear that it isn’t any more annoying than what NFJs do or what NTJs do and haven’t really said much about it outside this thread- and I’ve explained that it isn’t just me- I agree it’s kinda annoying when someone consistently demonstrates a derogatory attitude towards another type, systematically judging that type as inferior in some way…

    Those of us humble enough to accept that not everyone sees the world the way we do, do not pretend to understand what's going on inside the hearts and minds of total strangers. Then there are the INFJs...
    ^ *cough*
    Reality is a collective hunch. -Lily Tomlin

    5w4 sx/sp Johari / Nohari

  7. #97
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    I am pretty sure my inferior is Ti. My weak point has always been real-time argument because I unconsciously perceive it as conflict and freeze (I am assuming that in what I perceive as "high pressure" situations, my Fe wins out big time) However, when I am alone, the inferior Ti has helped me out when I needed to figure something out or truly cared about something. Saying that, I have noticed that I have a tendency to overcompensate with it and when it gets to the extreme, it tends to be all or nothing. Hours of alone time helped develop my introverted functions and being stuck in a Ni+Ti rut on and off for many years probably added to that.

  8. #98
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    actually isabel myers briggs and katharine myers both thought that jung was saying that tert is in opposite attitude to dom, so what MBTI actually says that INTPs tert is Se, not Si. this is pretty common misconception about MBTI.
    Interesting. Did not know that. So there is barely any support for tertiary Si then. I guess this just makes the looney insistence on arbitrary function order around here even more looney...

    also lenores model doesent say that INTP has Fi tert, she says that dom is Ti, aux Ne, tert Si and inferior Fe and refers to Fi and Se as right-brain alternatives(crows nest functions) and Ni and Te as left-brain alternatives(double agents).
    She places Fi third in the function hierarchy. You can be pedantic about the label "tertiary" but the net effect is what matters. The upshot is that she believes (and I agree, and so did you at one point, it seems) that Fi >>>> Fe for INTPs.. (And Se >>> Si).

    The rest is just your own rambling about the nature of tertiary development. You don't have anything to back this up beyond your subjective assessment of your own development so I don't find it remotely persuasive. Perhaps you can talk about how developing Si+Fe explicitly looks different from developing Fi (in your experience or in general)?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  9. #99
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Urarienev View Post
    I just believe that the order goes a certain way - I mix this theory with the "roles" or of the functions with the "lasagna". And you don't that's all. I now see why we don't always agree. I don't have my models mixed up. I like BOTH models...
    No. You do. You have them all mixed up (not integrated) and you'll have to read more to get them straightened out. (Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungian...tive_functions) Or you can just believe whatever - it's not exactly a science.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  10. #100
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    The minutia--the parts that make me want to stab myself in the throat--come in our typical approach to studying this stuff. I believe that we put the cart before the horse when we try to ascribe little behavioral details to, say, the inferior function. We have a hard enough time truly understanding the parts of cognition that are most manifest; I think that we ought to refine and further validate our models of those first, because that will give us promise for modeling the rest of our psyche satisfactorily.
    I don't see why we can't attack it from a number of angles... I personally find behaviours with unconscious motivations infinitely more fascinating the the parts of the psyche that are more accessible to consciousness. But that's because I love a good mystery.
    I think the most important thing to take away (which most people here gloss over or fail to acknowledge) is that the inferior version of a function will not look like the superior version. They are not remotely equivalent.

    So it's a simple name clash, two different uses of the word "rational." Got it. That solves the problem quite nicely.
    Not exactly... I'm suggesting that a rational function becomes irrational when it acts unconsciously.

    So Fe can be both rational (in its dominant form) and irrational (in an inferior form).
    I've personally looked at the descriptions for manifestations of inferior Ti, Se, and Si (those that would theoretically most apply to me) from "Was It Really Me?" and from a few websites. They seem to be very lazily built upon what such-and-such a type would theoretically look like under stress, and I can't force any of those three to resonate with me at all.

    But I actually found this thing to be a decent resource. It's nice and simple, and it forms explanations 'from the real world inward' instead of 'from the theory outward'--which I personally find to be refreshing.
    Now that one doesn't work as well for me...
    I agree that sometimes these theories are superficial and unsatisfying in their generalisability. The problem is that we don't have a satisfactory framework to hang them upon. Jung was fond of mysticism and notoriously imprecise, and his followers haven't really done much to elucidate his model. It remains far too intangible / unfalsifiable and open to (widely varying) interpretation.

    So it's fun to play around with, but it's not something to base your self-development on.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

Similar Threads

  1. [MBTItm] integration of the inferior
    By Feline in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-02-2014, 09:17 PM
  2. The Form of the Inferior - ITPs
    By Cegorach in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 09-05-2011, 10:50 AM
  3. Explaining the Inferior in terms of the Dominant
    By VagrantFarce in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01-12-2010, 10:12 PM
  4. Mixing the inferior with the dominant function
    By Oaky in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-09-2010, 06:25 PM
  5. What happens when the inferior first kicks in at a young age?
    By BlackCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 12-07-2009, 08:21 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