• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Function Order : Clarification.

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Is it not true that Ti and Te are both T?

If I gave this as the standard format Uc
fUnction and context.

Ergo Ti is T with a preference for applying it introvertedly and so on.

Is it not therefore true that an INTPs function order is TNSF?

Would I be correct in saying that there are only four functions listed in a types function order because of what it is describing, it does not require the other four?

Surely if the order is describing the order of preference for the four "functions" (as outlined above not in the normal subdivided Ti and Te sense) and making note of where the subject prefers to apply the function then noting the order of preference in which they use functions in a context they don't prefer is redundant.

OR am I barking up the wrong tree?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I completely agree. Takes a bunch of the confusion out, since it's misleading to think of Te and Ti as different in the same way as Te and Si or something.

"Order" is kind of a strong word to use, since it implies something about strength or ability of usage. Maybe just say something like, if you're an INTP, you have relationship w with T, x with N, y with S, and z with F. (different relationships with each function.)

Order is just 1 subbed for w, 2 subbed for x, 3 subbed for y, and 4 subbed for z, but you could potentially change around the last three and maintain the same type.

^because Nocap would say -- why TNSF and not TNFS?
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
Is it not true that Ti and Te are both T?

If I gave this as the standard format Uc
fUnction and context.

Ergo Ti is T with a preference for applying it introvertedly and so on.

Is it not therefore true that an INTPs function order is TNSF?

Would I be correct in saying that there are only four functions listed in a types function order because of what it is describing, it does not require the other four?

Surely if the order is describing the order of preference for the four "functions" (as outlined above not in the normal subdivided Ti and Te sense) and making note of where the subject prefers to apply the function then noting the order of preference in which they use functions in a context they don't prefer is redundant.

OR am I barking up the wrong tree?
technically you are correct. when you add in introversion and extroversion as directions, you are completely right.
 

entropie

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
16,767
MBTI Type
entp
Enneagram
783
you didnt just compare my ingenious Ti-ness to that wannabe thing Te's have, did you ? :D
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
technically you are correct. when you add in introversion and extroversion as directions, you are completely right.
Actually when you add the attitude it makes for the opposite. Ti like all introverted functions are subjective. Te like all extraverted functions are objective. This does not mean objective in the sense of detaching but that Ti makes us focus on the inner world and Te on the objective. Jung says:
Just as Darwin might possibly represent the normal extraverted thinking type, so we might point to Kant as a counter-example of the normal introverted thinking type. The former speaks with facts; the latter appeals to the subjective factor. Darwin ranges over the wide fields of objective facts, while Kant restricts himself to a critique of knowledge in general. But suppose a Cuvier be contrasted with a Nietzsche: the antithesis becomes even sharper.

The introverted thinking type is characterized by a priority of the thinking I have just described. Like his [p. 485] extraverted parallel, he is decisively influenced by ideas; these, however, have their origin, not in the objective data but in the subjective foundation. Like the extravert, he too will follow his ideas, but in the reverse direction: inwardly not outwardly.
So they’re only similar in that they are both thinking. However Fe is closer to Te and Fi to Ti….and so on through all of the cognitive functions. In essence the paring is more like Je,Pe,Ji,Pi.
 

Jack Flak

Permabanned
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
9,098
MBTI Type
type
Actually when you add the attitude it makes for the opposite. Ti like all introverted functions are subjective. Te like all extraverted functions are objective. This does not mean objective in the sense of detaching but that Ti makes us focus on the inner world and Te on the objective. Jung says:So they’re only similar in that they are both thinking. However Fe is closer to Te and Fi to Ti….and so on through all of the cognitive functions. In essence the paring is more like Je,Pe,Ji,Pi.
Oh thanks, after the Jung excerpt, everything will be clear to everyone. Haha, I'm just kidding.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
Actually when you add the attitude it makes for the opposite. Ti like all introverted functions are subjective. Te like all extraverted functions are objective. This does not mean objective in the sense of detaching but that Ti makes us focus on the inner world and Te on the objective. Jung says:So they’re only similar in that they are both thinking. However Fe is closer to Te and Fi to Ti….and so on through all of the cognitive functions. In essence the paring is more like Je,Pe,Ji,Pi.
i was saying he was correct in the order and am aware of the Ti Te difference, and you (well... jung) are correct, thank you :)
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Actually when you add the attitude it makes for the opposite. Ti like all introverted functions are subjective. Te like all extraverted functions are objective. This does not mean objective in the sense of detaching but that Ti makes us focus on the inner world and Te on the objective. Jung says:So they’re only similar in that they are both thinking. However Fe is closer to Te and Fi to Ti….and so on through all of the cognitive functions. In essence the paring is more like Je,Pe,Ji,Pi.
This makes no sense... Ti makes you focus internally? I thought Ti implied it was used internally?

Fe is closer to Te? Closer than what, Ti?

Te and Ti are both T are they not? Does Te have an attribute which Ti does not? A person who uses Ti lots would they not usually develop Te alongside it before they would develop Fi or Fe?
(Develop as in conscious control not strength or prevelance of use.)

Could you please go into a little more explanaition?
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
This makes no sense... Ti makes you focus internally? I thought Ti implied it was used internally?

Fe is closer to Te? Closer than what, Ti?

Te and Ti are both T are they not? Does Te have an attribute which Ti does not? A person who uses Ti lots would they not usually develop Te alongside it before they would develop Fi or Fe?
(Develop as in conscious control not strength or prevelance of use.)

Could you please go into a little more explanaition?
This is really not a slight toward you Xander and I purposely did not respond to your inquiry on this thread you started, but how can you have over three thousand posts and be asking some of the most basic principles of type? I started to respond in detail to your inquiry but realized that if you do not get it after all of your posting then I will be doing you a disservice.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
This is really not a slight toward you Xander and I purposely did not respond to your inquiry on this thread you started, but how can you have over three thousand posts and be asking some of the most basic principles of type? I started to respond in detail to your inquiry but realized that if you do not get it after all of your posting then I will be doing you a disservice.
Oh if only things were that simple. You see whilst looking into the differences between various INTPs I got to thinking about internal behaviour and realising that J and P only apply to extraverted activity produced the question of what applies to introverted activity. Unfortunately I posted the question before stumbling upon the obvious conclusion that neither J or P represent anything but a preference order. It's not that I'm not familiar with the theory, just a nice little corkscrew.

As for this particular thread it's more a question of being polite and trying to make sure that I don't stick my foot in it again. You see I just don't see this whole division between Te and Ti. I speak to ENTJs and INTJs and the only thing I'm seeing is NT not T and certainly no difference in the processes which they apply to things. Both processes seem to be the same but the focus changes in reference to what information the process is applied to. If that much is true then in terms of pure cognitive functions should there be a difference between this Ti and Te or should it be used purely as a notation of where the subject prefers to apply the function?

If Ti is no different to Te except that one is focused more on internal matters and the other upon external matters then what's the difference in pure function? Sure there's no doubt there'd be accumulated differences as each subject would approach things slightly differently but that's not the process as the behaviour which is implied by MBTI but not stated specifically.

In specific, throughout all the writings I've seen here about Ti and Te there seems to be no real difference in what they describe other than the arena to which T was applied. This would seem to indicate that T is T and the reason the e or i is lower case is that it doesn't indicate a change in function at all but rather a change in the prefered environment for the use of the function.

Of course this would make a mockery of J and P just a tad. Well to some degree.

INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe = TNSF
INTJ = Te Ni Se Fi = TNSF

It would make the two very similar except you'd tend to find them in totally different environments... I think.


Anyhoo... if you think I'm building to some kind of conclusion you're wrong. If I was only here to teach then I'd have more posts and probably a better job. I'm musing... get with the beat baggy....
 

"?"

New member
Joined
May 2, 2007
Messages
1,167
MBTI Type
TiSe
Oh if only things were that simple. You see whilst looking into the differences between various INTPs I got to thinking about internal behaviour and realising that J and P only apply to extraverted activity produced the question of what applies to introverted activity. Unfortunately I posted the question before stumbling upon the obvious conclusion that neither J or P represent anything but a preference order. It's not that I'm not familiar with the theory, just a nice little corkscrew.

INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe = TNSF
INTJ = Te Ni Se Fi = TNSF

Anyhoo... if you think I'm building to some kind of conclusion you're wrong. If I was only here to teach then I'd have more posts and probably a better job. I'm musing... get with the beat baggy....
I now understand what you are attempting to convey Xander and no there is no “pure function” as you allude to in meaning that there is pure thinking with no direction of attitude. In fact when Jung discusses any function he either makes the distinction of attitude direction (E/I) or he makes the comparison of let’s say thinking with it’s counterpart feeling and discusses them in tandem as judging or perceiving. I don’t want to post his entire description of thinking because it’s long, but I encourage you to read it for yourself here. As you can see even when he discusses a simple function like thinking he distinguishes between the extraverted type and introverted type. In fact Jung says that when you are discussing thinking in itself, you're not even talking about thinking as he proposes in his theory:
It might indeed be argued that a thinking whose aim is concerned neither with objective facts nor with general ideas scarcely merits the name 'thinking'. I am fully aware of the fact that the thought of our age, in common with its most eminent representatives, knows and acknowledges only the extraverted type of thinking. This is partly due to the fact that all thinking which attains visible form upon the world's surface, whether as science, philosophy, or even art, either proceeds direct from objects or flows into general ideas.
Jung does go on to say that logic of thought is the common denominator between the two functions (Te/Ti), but that is as far as he goes in discussing similarities:
When the objective orientation receives a certain predominance, the thinking is extraverted. This circumstance changes nothing as regards the logic of thought -- it merely determines that difference between thinkers which James regards as a matter of temperament. The orientation towards the object, as already explained, makes no essential change in the thinking function; only its appearance is altered.
In fact Jung’s whole preposition of any function focuses on the differences not commonalities. Jung thus says that it is impossible to Ti /Te, Fi/Fe, Ni/Ne….. simultaneously or with equal demonstration:
Such a conflict, we might think, could be easily adjusted if only we clearly discriminated objects of a subjective from those of an objective nature. Unfortunately, however, such a discrimination is a matter of impossibility, although not a few have attempted it. Even if such a separation were possible, it would be a very disastrous proceeding, since in themselves both orientations are one-sided, with a definitely restricted validity; hence they both require this mutual correction.
In the end you either or, not both.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
The orientation towards the object, as already explained, makes no essential change in the thinking function; only its appearance is altered.
This is what I meant and I think your examples from Jung's writing show.

Basically there is no Ti and Te, there is only T in the context of E or I.

No person is a pure I or a pure J or a pure anything but only by establishing these extremes is it possible to compare people and categorise them.

Anyhow, what I'm getting at is that when people start to analyse and propose that they "use Ti" or whatever, it's incorrect. They are using T, the context does not form part of the function.

Btw, I noticed I made an arse out of myself with those function order examples. It should have been INTP and ENTJ not INTJ :blush:

Anyhow... this comparison lead me to a piece of development theory I was working on a while ago and also dovetails into whether you can change your type or not nicely.

INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe = TNSF
ENTJ = Te Ni Se Fi = TNSF

If an INTP learns more extraversion then they should develop more ENTJ traits, they'd use their dominant T in a more extraverted environment leading to Te. Though they may eventually appear as quite like an ENTJ they never will be an ENTJ because at the least their unconscious influences will be different.

I wonder though if functions necessarily operate in pairs. I know that Jung said that if the primary function was extraverted then the secondary would be introverted to balance it but is it necessarily impossible to use Te and Ne at times?
 

Llewellyn

New member
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
330
MBTI Type
INtj
Enneagram
9w1
Your order for INTP of TNSF might be the order of strength, but the functional order (stream of data) I see as Ne -> Ti -> Fe -> Si (-> Ne). But that would be another post, or is it generally seen that way?

I think Ti is much more different from Te than that it is just directed inwards. I think there is an irrationality, a complexity about Ti (like in math it would use irreal numbers, reaching more places).
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
Your order for INTP of TNSF might be the order of strength, but the functional order (stream of data) I see as Ne -> Ti -> Fe -> Si (-> Ne). But that would be another post, or is it generally seen that way?
Ti Ne Si Fe that's the function order in terms of preference. I agree that it does make sense to place the sensing function first otherwise how do you gain the information necessary for the judging function right? However what about if there is some thought made about where to look for the information? Would that then place the judging function first?
I think Ti is much more different from Te than that it is just directed inwards. I think there is an irrationality, a complexity about Ti (like in math it would use irreal numbers, reaching more places).
Where as ESTJs are known for their Te supported rationality... not :D

Rationality depends more upon the user than the tool itself in my opinion.
 

mlittrell

New member
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
1,387
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
9w1
^Rationality

1. the state or quality of being rational.
2. the possession of reason.
3. agreeableness to reason; reasonableness.
4. the exercise of reason.
5. a reasonable view, practice, etc.
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
^Rationality

1. the state or quality of being rational.
2. the possession of reason.
3. agreeableness to reason; reasonableness.
4. the exercise of reason.
5. a reasonable view, practice, etc.
I think Llewellyn is on about the expanded uses of "rationality" as a term but yeah that's the kinda basis I was working from. It's a description of the persons manner more than whether they are consistent or not.
 

Llewellyn

New member
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
330
MBTI Type
INtj
Enneagram
9w1
Ti Ne Si Fe that's the function order in terms of preference. I agree that it does make sense to place the sensing function first otherwise how do you gain the information necessary for the judging function right? However what about if there is some thought made about where to look for the information? Would that then place the judging function first?
I think that's extraversion.

Rationality depends more upon the user than the tool itself in my opinion.

Yes, an NF e.g. can be rational.

All in all, rationality is just a power term ;)
 

Xander

Lex Parsimoniae
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
4,463
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
9w8
I think that's extraversion.
As a great man said once to me
"IP is EJ"

INTP = Ti Ne Si Fe
ENTJ = Te Ni Se Fi
ENTP = Ne Ti Fe Si
INTJ = Ni Te Fe Si

The pattern is always JPPJ or PJJP the P and the J in your type only states which is extraverted. Whether you are an E or an I defines which comes first. Hence even Ps can have a dominant judging function and vice versa.
Yes, an NF e.g. can be rational.
Shhh... don't tell them that!
All in all, rationality is just a power term ;)
But it does go with the 80's suits :newwink:
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Some touched on this, but the difference is the roles of the functions. So INTP and ENTJ can be both TNSF, but the INTP's T will lean more inward. When hit with outward T, it will strike him as oppositional, and then he will react in kind. When not under stress, he may then turn to external T to "back up" the conclusions of his internal processing. And environment does come into play, as this is a Te dominant society that demands that logic be externally substantiated, so some of us will appear to lean a lot to external logic to get our point across.
The ENTJ I imagine will be opposite, and start off with external T, and internal T will be oppositional. I imagine they (as well as the ESTJ) will look down on someone using "their own subjective logic", without the external facts. They'll only use internal logic to back up the external facts. ("See, this always happens; it's a universal principle at work").

The same with the good parent N. One will be external, with the internal counterpart as critical parent. I recognize this as seeing a whole lot of possibilities of what could happen in a situation, and fearing that the worse is what probably will happen. This gives INTP's their familiar "cynicism" about the world. ENTJ's will have a good parent use of future implications, and I imagine exploring multiple possibilities, in which their vision might not work, is what would be their critical parent. However, this process could be put to good use as "discovery".

So you have the same four processes, with the opposite attitudes shadowing each other, in parallel "good'/"bad" roles. T is a "true"/false" evaluation, and N is an abstract perception. The diferrence in shadow types is the source of these evaluations or perceptions, which does change certain aspects of the process, but it is still a version of the same process.
 
Top