16+80? the 'other' types

[Risen]

Ti>Se>Fe>Ni, more accurate.

 

[PuddleRiver]

Ni>Ti>Fe>Se...might be more me than I used to be. I'll think on it some more.

 

[Society]

[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION]


Very cool work with the table. The next step is writing biographies for each one and then titling them

interestingly enough, i found someone who did that for ENTPs, and did so using the exact same method of switching the order of the last 3 functions:

The Madvillain [Ti Si Fe]: Often fitting into the role of Mad Scientist, or Mad Doctor. The Madvillain often scores extremely high in rationality and introverted thinking. Combining Ne and Ti to create a wacky, almost comical, personality type. The Madvillain loves to play with people, often views the world as a little game or experiment, and is probably the bluntest of the Snowflakes. However, this does not make him the most honest. The Madvillain will always do what benefits him the most. He doesn’t take sides and will often not believe in Good & Evil instead replacing it with what is interesting and what is boring. [Correlation: Chaotic Neutral]

The Madvillain Quote: “There is no right and wrong. There’s only fun and boring.” ~ The Plague (Hackers, 1995) [Or: “I was born with a heart two sizes to small” ~ House MD]

The Trickster [Ti Fe Si]: The Trickster is often shown as the dominate type of ENTP. This type makes of the most of what ENTPs are and is most often seen in articles relating to ENTPs. The Trickster is the equivalent of the Coyote Spirit. It loves playing with people, more so than the madvillain, often its pranks are riskful for itself, and the person being pranked. The Trickster is not all bad though. With Fe as a a secondary it can connect with its victims and know when it has went too far. One of the most famous tricksters is Wile E Coyote (Road Runner). The Trickster views the world as a stage, and loves the spotlight. [Correlation: Chaotic ——-]

The Trickster Quote: “Right, too complicated. But what if I built a Burmese tiger trap?” ~ Wile E Coyote

The Doctor [Fe Ti Si]: The Doctor is definitely the nicest of all the ENTPs. Think of them as Lucifer before he got kicked out of heaven. They are just the right combination of real Gentlemen, New World Explorer, and Party Animal. They often love meeting new people. Their Ti rivals their Fe. This allowing them to connect with people in a much deeper manner. They’ll bite their tongues if they feel something they’ll say will hurt someone else. They are pretty much the exact opposite of The Madvillain. The Doctor has a view of the world that is more idealistic than The Trickster. It believes it was put here to help people with its cunning brilliance. It wants to learn & often engages its friends in group decisions on topics they’d normally not talk about. [Correlation: Chaotic Good]

The Doctor Quote: “They can shoot me dead, but the moral high ground is mine.” ~ Doctor Who (10th Doctor)

The Professor [Fe Si Ti]: Oh, have you ever had an ENTP Teacher? Somehow they managed to be more Social with your feelings, Traditional with their rules, and Innovative with their logic? Yep, that would be The Professor. A Ne dominate with strong Fe and Si. The Professor is a teacher who will seat you by names and then call you to the front of the class to preform a play with him (or her). They’re outside of the box traditionalists. Extremely creative social gentlemen. The Professor is all about teaching, because like The Doctor, it only wants to help. [Correlation: Neutral Good]

The Professor Quote: “So my idea of neurotic is spending too much time trying to correct a wrong. When I feel that I’m doing that, then I snap out of it.” ~ Gene Wilder

The Hero [Si Fe Ti]: Every type has a Good and a Bad; perceived by the public’s eye; The Madvillain was already shown as “The Bad Guy” so its only right that “The Hero” be the stereotypical good guy. The Hero somehow manages to combine an extreme background in Traditions with the sporadic craziness. This type can often be confused for ESTJ due to its strong need to correct people who it thinks is in “The Wrong”. It’s the ENTP that would create a safe way for little old ladies to walk across the street. The can’t restrain themselves when it comes to something they feel is wrong. [Correlation: Lawful Good]

The Hero Quote: “He called me irrepressible. This is a man who is truly irrepressible” ~ Q (Star Trek)

The True Neutral [Si Ti Fe]: Almost robotic in terms, not much is known about this type for two reasons: A) They don’t appear to have any personal opinions or feelings; B) This is the rarest of all ENTPs. The True Neutral is the guy you turn to when you want the truth and nothing but the truth. Strong in Traditions but has a weak morality. It can easily get the job done on pretty much any Job. The True Neutral can easily be confused for an INTJ. [Correlation: True Neutral]

The True Neutral Quote: ” ‘You’re out of my mind’ That’s between me and my mind. Let’s start with these rooms.” ~ Jubal Early (Firefly)


Article by William C. [Liam Wulf]

 

[lunalum]

Well, for example, an ENTP is just as much defined by having inferior Si as by having dominant Ne..... there's no one without the other, there's obviously some other psychological happening if this appears to be the case.

To a lesser extent, is a NeFeTiSi an ENTP or an ENFP with unusual auxiliary orientations? Is the stacking here more important or the orientations? This is more debatable.

The only "alternative order" I would halfway buy right now would be Ne,Ti=Fe,Si (i.e. an ENZP )

 

[Society]

Well, for example, an ENTP is just as much defined by having inferior Si as by having dominant Ne.....

Why? While i agree that Ne necessarily means Si (i see them as two sides of the same coin) i don't quite see why the location of one can be used to determine the location of the other. or in broader terms:

this pattern:
EP: Pe>Ji>Je>Pi
IP: Ji>Pe>Pi>Je
EJ: Je>Pi>Pe>Ji
IJ: Pi>Je>Ji>Pe

what is the cause of this?
on what basis do we assume it?

 

[miss fortune]

as someone who fits into one of the non-traditional groups there, I've never quite felt like I fit into any of the descriptions or categories given, so why bother claiming something

I've argued against strict structure for years on here though and there are some people who won't have it because people who write books say it is a certain way... it makes no sense to me, but whatever

 

[Sinmara]

If we're going to jumble them all up, I like think of myself as more Ti>Fe>Ni>Se, really.
[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], I'm curious as to why you grouped me with the INFJs.

 

[lunalum]

Why? While i agree that Ne necessarily means Si (i see them as two sides of the same coin) i don't quite see why the location of one can be used to determine the location of the other. or in broader terms:

this pattern:
EP: Pe>Ji>Je>Pi
IP: Ji>Pe>Pi>Je
EJ: Je>Pi>Pe>Ji
IJ: Pi>Je>Ji>Pe

what is the cause of this?
on what basis do we assume it?

Well....... it's basically for one to rise at the top it has to always push the other one down. (Going along with the first example) Intuition and sensation are opposites, one dismissing the actuality of things for what they could be, and one dismissing the potential of things for what they actually are. Both of these things are going on for everyone, but when you're talking of an Ne dom, you're taking about someone who most habitually is dismissing the actuality for the potential, and for this to habituate, the reverse of that must be repressed. Thinking and feeling don't have to be repressed because they are working on an entirely different dynamic of their own. Se has to be rejected entirely because as another extraverted perceiving function for it to be present it would have to take the place of Ne entirely..... but then Si isn't quite that threatening so it's kind of kept on the border of accepted and rejected, of conscious and unconscious.

This is the state of the inferior. Ne decides to keep it around but treats it like a toddler, sits the kid in the backseat, plays a movie, but still there's the occasional poke on the shoulder, trying to climb into the front seat, having to stop to eat or to go potty or find a teddy bear...... Anyway an Ne dom can't just let Si in the front seat because Ne will want to turn left and Si will want to turn right and they'll both grab the wheel and end up either going nowhere or swerving off the road. (Again, the T and F functions can sit in the passenger seat because they have no rejection of the driver's ways) The only way for them to function together is to keep them in different rows and for Ne to be able to go its own way as dominant but still listen to the little Si in the backseat and keeps its complaints in mind and in check.

 

[Society]

If we're going to jumble them all up, I like think of myself as more Ti>Fe>Ni>Se, really.

[MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION], I'm curious as to why you grouped me with the INFJs.

Because i've noted your use of Ti and Ni, which means you'd have to be an NFJ/STP, and my impression of you, though perhaps somewhat shallow in the amount of interaction i had to go by, is that you are very much a Judger... though like i said, most of the above "non MBTI-kosher" typing's are half-witted shots in the dark when i was looking for examples. i've had no problem editing a few people's location within it based on the feedback.

 

[Society]

Well....... it's basically for one to rise at the top it has to always push the other one down. (Going along with the first example) Intuition and sensation are opposites, one dismissing the actuality of things for what they could be, and one dismissing the potential of things for what they actually are. Both of these things are going on for everyone, but when you're talking of an Ne dom, you're taking about someone who most habitually is dismissing the actuality for the potential, and for this to habituate, the reverse of that must be repressed. Thinking and feeling don't have to be repressed because they are working on an entirely different dynamic of their own. Se has to be rejected entirely because as another extraverted perceiving function for it to be present it would have to take the place of Ne entirely..... but then Si isn't quite that threatening so it's kind of kept on the border of accepted and rejected, of conscious and unconscious.

This is the state of the inferior. Ne decides to keep it around but treats it like a toddler, sits the kid in the backseat, plays a movie, but still there's the occasional poke on the shoulder, trying to climb into the front seat, having to stop to eat or to go potty or find a teddy bear...... Anyway an Ne dom can't just let Si in the front seat because Ne will want to turn left and Si will want to turn right and they'll both grab the wheel and end up either going nowhere or swerving off the road. (Again, the T and F functions can sit in the passenger seat because they have no rejection of the driver's ways) The only way for them to function together is to keep them in different rows and for Ne to be able to go its own way as dominant but still listen to the little Si in the backseat and keeps its complaints in mind and in check.

this is a very interesting take. But if the Ne has to repress the Si all the way to the inferior, why then can the INxP (Ji>Ne>Si>Je) be able to repress the Si only to one level bellow the Ne? it seems that functions throughout the MBTI are able to repress their counterparts to either 3 places bellow them or 1 place bellow them (with the unavailability of repressing it to 2 places bellow them merely stemming from the E/I/E/I & I/E/I/E structure). why couldn't the ENxP do the same as the INxP and have Ne>Si?

another direction to approach it is what if developmental theory currently extrapolated form MBTI is wrong, and instead we overcome the different elements of the repression structure within the MBTI individually, in which case wouldn't it be possible for an ENTP to develop the Si earlier then other functions, to the point of being influenced by it and using it to an auxiliary or tertiary extent rather then the "official" tertiary/auxiliary functions?


this might be a good place to add my own interpretation to the MBTI, as i am inclined to seen the corresponding functions as two outputs - two sides of the same coin - of the same trait.
for this example, while Si reacts to a new experience by going back to draw from one's mental collection of experiences and gauge a comparison, Ne reacts to new patterns by going back to one's mental collection of patterns to connect & breed them together into forming new patterns.
while SJs and NPs are both Collectors in the back of our minds, i think a possible explanation to why we focus more on one then the other, is that our past experience (Si) tends to give a very coherent clear cut answer to the mental question at hand, maximizing the need for clarity & order (satisfying the J need), while our breeding grounds for emergent new patterns give us the biggest number of answers we haven't encountered before, maximizing the need for stimuli (satisfying the P need).

i'm not saying that i adhere by that interpretation and you have to explain by it for me to accept it, just putting it out there to see what it adds to the conversation.

 

[Sinmara]

Because i've noted your use of Ti and Ni, which means you'd have to be an NFJ/STP, and my impression of you, though perhaps somewhat shallow in the amount of interaction i had to go by, is that you are very much a Judger... though like i said, most of the above "non MBTI-kosher" typing's are half-witted shots in the dark when i was looking for examples. i've had no problem editing a few people's location within it based on the feedback.

I wasn't saying you were incorrect or that I wanted you to move my place on the chart. I was just curious as to what your thought process was that made you think I was, that's all.

 

[Such Irony]

Assuming I've got my type right as INTP, I think I might be Ti > Si > Ne > Fe

I have pretty strong Si.

 

[Salomé]

on what basis does the MBTI assume they can't exist?

You are mixing up only loosely related theories.

Function order is mostly meaningless and unproven. It doesn't produce type. Type only tells us about Dom/aux (and inf by implication).

All that can be meaningfully said about functions within MBTI can be expressed thus:

Ptypes
[Ne / Se ] + [ Ti / Fi ]

Jtypes
[Ni / Si ] + [ Te / Fe ]

Everything else follows from these principles (and if it does not, it's invalid or at best, speculative).

Less is more.

The prevalence of a particular way of perceiving and judging, necessarily pushes the "opposite" ways of perceiving and judging into subordinate roles.

Yes. This is embedded in the notion of dichotomies. If you remove dichotomies, type becomes meaningless.

Your scheme disregards the dichotomous nature of type. Which is fine to do, but you are left with continuums rather than discrete types of endless variety. (Essentially, your logic is kinda fucked. )

INTPCentral did it (kind of)

http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?36491-The-24-types-of-INTP

This was meant satirically. It adds nothing and subtracts a good deal of clarity. It's helpful to recognise that strength of preference is non-trivial, but to convert that understanding into sub-types is just a joke (or at least, should be).

Edit. To visualise the logic of MBTI, I find it helpful to consider it represented in 3-dimensional space as a cube (or a nested cube, to include E/I dimension). Then the operations that are 'permissible' / meaningful become immediately apparent.

The midpoint on any axis = X, other combinations do not resolve to a "type", they float somewhere in the void.

 

[Andy]

you know, these unbolded folks right here:

Who killed them? Or rather, on what basis does the MBTI assume they can't exist?

To answer that you have to unsertand the way the functions relate to each other. To do that you need an accurate understanding of what the functions are. I'll use Pe and Pi to explain.

Pe is an explorative urge, a desire to experience things and act spontaneously. Se explore based on what is there, Ne is more motivated by what things represent. Pi is the urge to plan ahead, review what is known and consider implications.

Now, the more time you spend sitting on your ass thinking about what you intend to do, the less time you spend actually doing it. Extensive preplanning precludes spontinatity. The more time you spend considering if something should be done or not, the less likely you are to do something off the cuff, just to see how it turns out.

Pe and Pi preclude each other, which rules out many of the combinations you've listed. Ji and Je follow a similar pattern. Ji is to do with assessment of value based in ideas of worth, where as Je is assessment based in ideas of utility.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

You are mixing up only loosely related theories.

Function order is mostly meaningless and unproven. It doesn't produce type. Type only tells us about Dom/aux (and inf by implication).

All that can be meaningfully said about functions within MBTI can be expressed thus:

Ptypes
[Ne / Se ] + [ Ti / Fi ]

Jtypes
[Ni / Si ] + [ Te / Fe ]

Everything else follows from these principles (and if it does not, it's invalid or at best, speculative).

Less is more.

Yes. This is embedded in the notion of dichotomies. If you remove dichotomies, type becomes meaningless.

Your scheme disregards the dichotomous nature of type. Which is fine to do, but you are left with continuums rather than discrete types of endless variety. (Essentially, your logic is kinda fucked. )
This was meant satirically. It adds nothing and subtracts a good deal of clarity. It's helpful to recognise that strength of preference is non-trivial, but to convert that understanding into sub-types is just a joke (or at least, should be).

Edit. To visualise the logic of MBTI, I find it helpful to consider it represented in 3-dimensional space as a cube (or a nested cube, to include E/I dimension). Then the operations that are 'permissible' / meaningful become immediately apparent.

The midpoint on any axis = X, other combinations do not resolve to a "type", they float somewhere in the void.

To answer that you have to unsertand the way the functions relate to each other. To do that you need an accurate understanding of what the functions are. I'll use Pe and Pi to explain.

Pe is an explorative urge, a desire to experience things and act spontaneously. Se explore based on what is there, Ne is more motivated by what things represent. Pi is the urge to plan ahead, review what is known and consider implications.

Now, the more time you spend sitting on your ass thinking about what you intend to do, the less time you spend actually doing it. Extensive preplanning precludes spontinatity. The more time you spend considering if something should be done or not, the less likely you are to do something off the cuff, just to see how it turns out.

Pe and Pi preclude each other, which rules out many of the combinations you've listed. Ji and Je follow a similar pattern. Ji is to do with assessment of value based in ideas of worth, where as Je is assessment based in ideas of utility.

Both correct. I won't say any more about dichotomies or the way inw hich the fucntions work because you explained better than I could. But I will try to say how this relates to some of the other points made here - not the "internal workings" of the functions but rather the "external implications" of this theory.

People have said that this kind of sub-categorizing is a better idea than traditional Function Order Theory because "people don't fit into neat little boxes". But trying to categorize every different way a certain type may act as the result of a revised "function order" (well, actually the opposite of Function Order Theory) - is PRECISELY an attempt to fit a chaotic reality, into neat little boxes.

The same person can emphasize functions in a different way, on different days, depending on some inner feeling which MBTI does not claim to know. This is how it works in actuality. Some days an ENTP - to use the exmaple in this thread - may be "the Hero", some days, he may be "the robot", other days, "the Professor". Different external variables can trigger different internal (unconscious) repsonses, causing the same person to show a different personality on different days, as we all do.

I think these kinds of attempts to subcategorize, come from the search for identity, through MBTI. The person thinks "damn, I feel so different to other XXXX type, there are superficial simialrities but we differ in so many ways, there must be a reason, there must be 'true type' which I REALLY belong to".

No. the OPPOSITE is true. MBTI describes the STYLES but there is NO deeper identity. People think it's the opposite, i.e. "on the surface we are different but deep down we are both XXXX type". Wrong. On the surface, you are processing ifnromation and communicating in similair ways - even if you dress differently or whatever (perhaps due to background, or perhaps, ironicallyu, because of the result of some difference which is DEEPER and not more superficial than MBTI) - but deep down, we are completely different people with different unconscious desires and fears, and the reuslt of different environments. Cognitive Functions just "mediate" the "rocky path" between those two things.

The "happy" consequence of this, is that it SHOULD help us to overcome our misunderstandings between types, to help us realize that we are more similar than we thought. The "unhappy" consequence is that it means, there is NO "deeper unity" with other people just because the same type, it is simply a superficial similairty of thought and communication but DOES NOT ultimately define us fully.

Cognitive Functions are the beginning of a jouney, not the end. They tell you the tools you have and identify natural strengths, and areas which are potential for development (Tert+Inferior), as well as areas which are not "your thing", but which you need to understand in order to realize they are not just people being assholes (the way we may percieve the shadow Functions - i.e. I used to be unable to comprehend strong Fi, because unlike Fe, I had no conception of it even as an "aspiration" or a "guilty neglected area" - rather I just thought it was people being deliberately difficult. Now I know otherwise).

But CF theory does not explain what you choose to do with that set of tools. Each person decides that based on complex factors which operate both on a deeper internal level than MBTI (the unconscious) and on an external level (environmental conditional and triggers). And even all of that does not fully define a person, because when the thought or desire arises, we still have the choice to accept or reject it - but that's another post.

 

[Society]

You are mixing up only loosely related theories.

Function order is mostly meaningless and unproven. It doesn't produce type. Type only tells us about Dom/aux (and inf by implication).

All that can be meaningfully said about functions within MBTI can be expressed thus:

Ptypes
[Ne / Se ] + [ Ti / Fi ]

Jtypes
[Ni / Si ] + [ Te / Fe ]

Everything else follows from these principles (and if it does not, it's invalid or at best, speculative).

first of all thank you for actually tackling the challenge this thread was supposed to pose instead of agreeing. this is the core debate this thread aims to stimulate, with a seemingly high degree of failure (what's with all the agree'ers?).

so fast forward:

within this structure:
EP: Pe>Ji>Je>Pi
IP: Ji>Pe>Pi>Je
EJ: Je>Pi>Pe>Ji
IJ: Pi>Je>Ji>Pe

we see two core principles:

J>P>P>J (EJ & IP)
P>J>J>P (EP & IJ)

I>E>I>E (introverts)
E>I>E>I (extroverts)

in other words, we are assuming that these:
J>P>J>P
J>J>P>P
P>J>P>J
P>P>J>J

as well as these:
I>I>E>E
I>E>E>I
E>E>I>I
E>I>I>E

are impossible.

why would they be impossible?

and please remember we're talking psychology here, so "innate for the system" doesn't quite meet the benchmark, yes the system is internally consistent, but that doesn't mean it's principles are applicable to it's theoretical subjects (people's personalities).

 

[Society]

To answer that you have to unsertand the way the functions relate to each other. To do that you need an accurate understanding of what the functions are. I'll use Pe and Pi to explain.

Pe is an explorative urge, a desire to experience things and act spontaneously. Se explore based on what is there, Ne is more motivated by what things represent. Pi is the urge to plan ahead, review what is known and consider implications.

Now, the more time you spend sitting on your ass thinking about what you intend to do, the less time you spend actually doing it. Extensive preplanning precludes spontinatity. The more time you spend considering if something should be done or not, the less likely you are to do something off the cuff, just to see how it turns out.

Pe and Pi preclude each other, which rules out many of the combinations you've listed. Ji and Je follow a similar pattern. Ji is to do with assessment of value based in ideas of worth, where as Je is assessment based in ideas of utility.

see but we do know that Ji and Je, as well as Pi and Pe, can follow each other, that is ingrained in the current system as the auxilary and tertiery functions, so the assumption is, as Morto said, that the dominant function innately pushes it's corresponding "sister function" to the inferior.

to apply it to your theory, we do know that people with (EJs and IPs) can have a "more balanced" level of planning (Pi) and doing (Pe) to the point of having those sit side by side each other as the auxiliary and tertiary functions. so why is it possible for them, but impossible if Pi/Pe doms?

 

[Society]

To answer that you have to unsertand the way the functions relate to each other. To do that you need an accurate understanding of what the functions are. I'll use Pe and Pi to explain.

Pe is an explorative urge, a desire to experience things and act spontaneously. Se explore based on what is there, Ne is more motivated by what things represent. Pi is the urge to plan ahead, review what is known and consider implications.

Now, the more time you spend sitting on your ass thinking about what you intend to do, the less time you spend actually doing it. Extensive preplanning precludes spontinatity. The more time you spend considering if something should be done or not, the less likely you are to do something off the cuff, just to see how it turns out.

Pe and Pi preclude each other, which rules out many of the combinations you've listed. Ji and Je follow a similar pattern. Ji is to do with assessment of value based in ideas of worth, where as Je is assessment based in ideas of utility.

see but we do know that Ji and Je, as well as Pi and Pe, can follow each other, that is ingrained in the current system as the auxilary and tertiery functions, so the assumption is, as Morto said, that the dominant function innately pushes it's corresponding "sister function" to the inferior.

to apply it to your theory, we do know that people with (EJs and IPs) can have a "more balanced" level of planning (Pi) and doing (Pe) to the point of having those sit side by side each other as the auxiliary and tertiary functions. so why is it possible for them, but impossible if Pi/Pe doms?

 

[Andy]

see but we do know that Ji and Je, as well as Pi and Pe, can follow each other, that is ingrained in the current system as the auxilary and tertiery functions, so the assumption is, as Morto said, that the dominant function innately pushes it's corresponding "sister function" to the inferior.

to apply it to your theory, we do know that people with (EJs and IPs) can have a "more balanced" level of planning (Pi) and doing (Pe) to the point of having those sit side by side each other as the auxiliary and tertiary functions. so why is it possible for them, but impossible if Pi/Pe doms?

Because a balance is different to lots of both. You can have 90% Pi and 10% Pe, or 60% Pe and 40% Pi, but you can't have 90% Pe and 60% Pi, because that gives you 150% of your mental efforts and time devoted to the Pe/Pi combination. Don't try that because it makes your brains explode, which is messy.

The primary function has to rule, followed by the others in layers. Why? So you can make decision and prioritise. That's what the functions are about - what you want. If they are all present at too similar levels then you have trouble telling what you want, or even what you don't want because everything has equal priority.

The other thing you need to understand is the balance between action and contemplation. To be a functional human being, you need a bit of both. Too much of either makes you ineffectual, either because you do nothing, or because you do the wrong thing and never learn from it.

Once the primary is known, the auxilary has to take the opposite action/contemplation stance to create the balance.

 

[Society]

Because a balance is different to lots of both. You can have 90% Pi and 10% Pe, or 60% Pe and 40% Pi, but you can't have 90% Pe and 60% Pi, because that gives you 150% of your mental efforts and time devoted to the Pe/Pi combination. Don't try that because it makes your brains explode, which is messy.

The primary function has to rule, followed by the others in layers. Why? So you can make decision and prioritise. That's what the functions are about - what you want. If they are all present at too similar levels then you have trouble telling what you want, or even what you don't want because everything has equal priority.

The other thing you need to understand is the balance between action and contemplation. To be a functional human being, you need a bit of both. Too much of either makes you ineffectual, either because you do nothing, or because you do the wrong thing and never learn from it.

Once the primary is known, the auxilary has to take the opposite action/contemplation stance to create the balance.

your extending the flow of information (we judge the information we perceive) to assume that we judge all the information we perceive and perceive all that we can judge, thus concluding that P=J, and one could not, let's say, utilize 120% J and 80% P. but there is a loophole around that which maintains that flow of information, through recursive perception and recursive judgement.

what is stopping someone from using the judgement they passed over the information they got to pass further judgement as a substitute for perceiving new information from the perceiving functions, and do repeat the process with that judgment? likewise with perception.

in other words, why couldn't we process things as:
P -> J -> J -> J -> J -> J
or
P -> P -> P -> P -> J
or any combination thereof, thus maintaining the flow of information from perception to judgement without necessarily making them equal partners in the process?