proteanmix
Plumage and Moult
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2007
- Messages
- 5,514
- Enneagram
- 1w2
Everyone has a perceiving function which can be either dominant or auxiliary. Location of the perceiving function doesn't determine the strength of the perceiving function and I suppose the same is true for the judging fuction. For example, an ESP being a dominant perceiver, doesn't necessarily have stronger/better/more accurate Se than and ISP. It's just where the perceiving function falls in the cognitive functions.
I'm reading Jung's Psychological Types and from what I'm understanding he's not saying that the dominant function is the most skillfully used function. The dominant function is simply the function that a person feels most comfortable using, which doesn't indicate if they use it well. Like taking a certain route home not because it's the shortest or most scenic, but just because it's the one you like the best. It seems that because a person uses it the most they'd also be more adept at it, but it's not necessarily true although it can be.
What confuses me is the insistence that the auxiliary function is weaker than the dominant. Everyone has a way of receiving information (S or N) and a way of evaluating information (T or F). Saying that a dominant judger (Ti, Fi, Fe, Te) takes in less information than a dominant perceiver or that a dominant perceiver (Se, Ne, Ni, Si) evaluates information less than a dominant judger is psychologically off balance. I don't know how to explain it so possible explanations of why this is or isn't true are appreciated.
I'm reading Jung's Psychological Types and from what I'm understanding he's not saying that the dominant function is the most skillfully used function. The dominant function is simply the function that a person feels most comfortable using, which doesn't indicate if they use it well. Like taking a certain route home not because it's the shortest or most scenic, but just because it's the one you like the best. It seems that because a person uses it the most they'd also be more adept at it, but it's not necessarily true although it can be.
What confuses me is the insistence that the auxiliary function is weaker than the dominant. Everyone has a way of receiving information (S or N) and a way of evaluating information (T or F). Saying that a dominant judger (Ti, Fi, Fe, Te) takes in less information than a dominant perceiver or that a dominant perceiver (Se, Ne, Ni, Si) evaluates information less than a dominant judger is psychologically off balance. I don't know how to explain it so possible explanations of why this is or isn't true are appreciated.