• 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.

The pairings aren't pairings--Te/Fi, Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, Si/Ne--they're identities

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
They're always paired in any given type. If Te is present in the top four, so is Fi. If Ti, then Fe. If Ne, then Si. And if Ni, then Se. (And vice versa on all of them.)

I wonder, do these pairings represent two functions together, or a person's exaggeration--her unbalancing of a balanced thing--via preference. That is, what if Te and Fi, or any of the other pairs, are not pairs, but instead they are exaggerations, distortions, extreme perspectives placed on things that, somehow, are the same thing?

What same thing? Dunno.

But why suggest the pairs might somehow be not pairs but somehow "the same thing"? Because I look around and it seems to me that inferior and tertiary, but particularly inferior, functions have an essential role in the life of the top two functions. Like, it seems that Ni really can't exist without Se. How could it? With no information coming in about what things look like moment to moment, how is there anything at all for Ni to sit back and process? Likewise, Ne and Si, if there is no library of at least some basic steadfast unchanging well known and detailed information, how is Ne to propose its wild possibilities? And maybe likewise Te+Fi and Ti+Fe, but I haven't thought how to make that seem plausible yet.


But so what this would suggest is that, once again, you don't mix and match functions. You get judgment and you get perception, and that's it. And for some reason, you're born wildly unbalanced in which aspect of judgment and which aspect of perception you prefer.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
It's about acceptance and rejection. You choose your dominant orientation, and initially reject the other. Then you choose your dominant function, and its opposite is rejected to the opposite orientation. The auxiliary is also placed in the opposite orientation, and then its opposite, the tertiary ends up in the dominant orientation.
These four become the "ego-compatible" functions. The reverse of their orientations (dominant function with opposite orientation; dominant orientation with opposite function, etc) are then even more rejected by the ego, and become the shadows.
So yes, those pairings do work in tandem.
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
I've been thinking on this problem for sometime. It occures to me that such functions represent the same attitude, but opperating in two different spheres. I'll try to explain by looking at Ni-Se, as I understand them best.

It strikes me that both of these functions have an exploring, experimenting nature. Se causes the user to seek out new sensations and experiences in the physical world. It has a rather raw nature to it, as it opperates on just about the most basic physical level possible.

Ni users seek out new concepts and view points, twisting them back and forth. It too is raw, as the thoughts it provides are often wordless and half formed. Going from one function to another is a shift in focus, but not attitude. An INTJ (or INFJ) explores the physical world in the same manor as they do the inner one, just with less skill.

I think similar statements could be made regarding the other sets. I feel I understand Te-Fi (both utilising/analytical), but [I'm struggling rather more with Fe-Ti and Si-Ne. Most likely that's because I don't use them. All thoughts welcome.
 

Tyrant

New member
Joined
Aug 15, 2009
Messages
181
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
Pretty much - Socionics touches on this, but MBTI does not.

Socionics said:
On the Fe-Ti and Fi-Te divide

So, everyone is "subjective" at one level regarding external information. However, in different ways.

One imperfect way of putting it is this:

Fi-Te: "liking or disliking" (ie being "subective" with regards to) a kind of source of input, "source" also being "individuals"
Fe-Ti: "liking or dislikng" a kind of input

Te: takes any input "as it is given" as long as it is from a reliable source (or person)
Fi: tells you which sources are reliable (or which people to trust)

Fi is here the filter.

Fe: takes the input not "as it is given" but "reading between the lines"
Ti: organizes such input logically, rejecting the bits that do not fit logically.

Ti is here the filter.

In both cases, Fe and Te get the external, dynamic, input - they are the "antennae" - and Fi and Ti select what is "correct" according to "static" criteria of how things, or people, connect - they are the "filters".

That's just a short excerpt from a forums.
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Pretty much - Socionics touches on this, but MBTI does not.



That's just a short excerpt from a forums.

I take it those are scionic functions, which I gather are a little different to MBTI functions. My knowledge of socionics is limited.
 

VagrantFarce

Active member
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
1,558
OK, Ti-Fe:

One is like getting in tune with the way the world works, regardless of our feelings; you understand that everything is just a big bundle of individual variables bouncing off each other. The other takes the complete opposite perspective, and focuses on the feelings of others regardless of how things "really" are. It's the difference between "you look good in that dress" and "it makes you look fat." :)

OK, Si and Ne:

Si is a bit like navigating with a map that's been carved into your own body; you know what works for you and what doesn't work for you, you can feel it in your skin. This greates a natural distrust/skepticism of anything you're not familiar with. Ne is the complete opposite, and is all about following wild imaginative tangents wherever they go. It's the difference between "The taste of parsley makes me nauseous" and "let's feed the parsley to the cat!". :)
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Ack! Circular reasoning! I observed that the pairings (Fe+Ti, Te+Fi, Se+Ni, Si+Ne) are always found together, and went on to say something about what this must mean. But they're not always "found" together. They are all posited together, making the 16 types.

So, are they always found together in fact? The socionics discussion mentioned and the concepts of acceptance and rejection sound good, and they all in fact play out that way in real people?

Not sure what I'm aiming for here, sounds a little like trying to reduce the 8 functions to three basic concepts, judgment, perception, and preference. And I guess that makes preference a hideously complex device, and still doesn't really illuminate its inner workings.


Dang! Preference, what *is* it!?!
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Pretty much - Socionics touches on this, but MBTI does not.

That's in a forum post... and I haven't seen it written anywhere else in socionics literature. So it's basically the same thing... since we elaborate on the MBTI's functions (it's not really MBTI, we're just using the jungian functions that MBTI follows at this point) just like the socionics people elaborate on their functions.
 

BlackCat

Shaman
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
7,038
MBTI Type
ESFP
Enneagram
9w8
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
As for what those functions represent, I'd say that Te/Fi, Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, and Si/Ne are the same process, but operating at very different wavelengths. Opposite ends of the same spectrum.
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Like, it seems that Ni really can't exist without Se. How could it? With no information coming in about what things look like moment to moment, how is there anything at all for Ni to sit back and process?



MBTI is but one theory about functions. That doesn't mean it's correct.
Check out this little description of the Singer-Loomis Inventory.
The last sentence is most relevant to your post.

The Singer-Loomis Inventory of Personality


The 8 psychological types are viewed as independent cognitive modes, and the test attempts to measure their relative development in the individual.
Since one type of development is not assumed to exclude another, the manual describes people with, for example, both introverted intuition and extraverted sensation highly developed.


It is only those most brainwashed by MBTI who fail to see it's possible to have both Ni+Se highly developed.
As a matter of fact, according to some, the inferior function can be utilized so much that it is actually mistaken for the person's dominant function.
 

teslashock

Geolectric
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
1,690
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w6
I think the functional pairings are like business partners. They complement each other and help each other along. It's like mixing boiling water with ice to get the perfect temperature for a soothing bath. That's why some sort of balance is key, imo.

I have the most personal experience with Ne/Si, so I can elaborate on that pairing with the most ease: Ne pulls data from inferior Si to find patterns and make connections between a bunch of things. Without Si, I wouldn't have the knowledge base to put a twist on the usual details and make things funny and/or different. I wouldn't know how to poke fun at and/or tweak tradition if I didn't understand tradition in the first place, and I wouldn't be able to go against the grain if I didn't understand where the grain typically was. I don't like to think inside the box, but it helps to understand what's inside the box in order to better maneuvre my way outside of it.

I think these same kinds of partnerships can be seen with Te/Fi, Fe/Ti, Se/Ni, and of course, the function that is the dominant one out of the pair will affect how the pair interacts.
 

StrappingYoungLad

New member
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
199
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
9w8
So I can't use Ni on its own? It needs to be in a Se context? Or perhaps Ni comes as a side-effect?
 

Matthew_Z

That chalkboard guy
Joined
Jun 15, 2009
Messages
1,256
MBTI Type
xxxx
Function pairs are complementary. This is the nature of their relation. The functions influence each other, their collective strengths often correspond. (that is, a person's combined strength in their 1st and 4th functions are often roughly equatable to the combined strength of their 2nd and 3rd functions.) I agree that function pairs are closely related. However, I will assert that the statement that they are identities is false.

Functions, as a whole, are understood to be all part of the larger entity of neural processing. To make studying of this entity easier, cognitive ability is divided into functions. By definition (and perhaps definition alone) functions are differentiated. To assert them as some sort of "identity" would require a change in definition.This change would quite possibly be arbitrary; it would partially change the perspective on functional analysis, but it would also deprive the ability to study the nature of 8 different functions by simplifying them into four. Si and Ne are about as much the "same thing" as Si and Ni are.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Yeah, "identity" is the wrong claim. (As an Ni user I really want to say it's just the wrong word for what I was thinking, but hey, I made it as a claim so, wrong claim.)

How about "unity"? The pairs are obliged to be together.

So that's what I'm looking for, some reason for saying, or at least describing, the pairs as, I dunno, Siamese twins, bound together. The question of relative strength of the partners is still open.

But that reason, that thing that'll let one make such a claim about bound pairs, is, once a-damn-gain, the thing MBTI seems not to have anything much to say about: preference. The nature, character and origin of preference.

That, I suppose, is the gigantic, cult-spawning weakness of MBTI as a scientific or intellectual system, you just gotta believe in preference.

Does Jung ever say anything about what where preference comes from? Maybe it's not actually within the purview of either Jung or MBTI to say. Preference isn't a cognitive function, is it? If it were, then there would have to be some deeper theory of cognition, something about the entity that does the preferring, I guess.

So... preference...


It's in your DNA?
 

sofmarhof

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
327
MBTI Type
INTP
Things are always explained to an MBTI noob in this order: 1) There are functions: Ti, Te, Fi, Fe, etc. 2) Functions happen to always be paired a certain way: TiFe, etc. We think of them as two discrete things that happen to go together, so of course someone is going to ask, "Well, why should they always go together that way?"

But it might just be an issue of naming, and of the order in which we explain them. TiFe shouldn't be thought of as two things put together, Ti+Fe, but as one thing with two parts. Like a brain, it has two distinct halves, but the fundamental unit is one brain.

Not sure if I actually think that's true. What is the unifying characteristic of TiFe, shared by an INTP and an ESFJ? What might we call it besides TiFe?
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
So I can't use Ni on its own? It needs to be in a Se context? Or perhaps Ni comes as a side-effect?


I'm not sure if a function can ever be used on its own, though if one can it would be percieving function. A judging function cannot opperate without information being supplied to it by a percieving function, but it is conceivable that a preceiving function could gather data without any attempt to analyse it being made, creating something of an idiot savant.

I think this fact is one of the things that makes the functions hard to understand. In pretty much any situation, you will get two functions working together. Both the pairing and dominance order will effect the out come, so the obserable output of Te will be different for Si&Te, Te&Si, Ni&Te or any other combination. So to understan "pure" Te (if thats the right word) you need to seperate it from the flavour given to it by the percieving function used and to do that you need to under stand that function as well. Trouble is, you'll pretty much never see a perceiving function working on its own either...

Because of this, you pretty much have to try and understand all the functions at once, starting off with a vague idea of what each one means and then refining your ideas one step at a time. With each step the picture gets a little clearer and you start to see the ways the all blend into each other, not really discrete entities at all.

At least, that's been my experience with them. I'm still learning a lot.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
They're always paired in any given type. If Te is present in the top four, so is Fi. If Ti, then Fe. If Ne, then Si. And if Ni, then Se. (And vice versa on all of them.)

I wonder, do these pairings represent two functions together, or a person's exaggeration--her unbalancing of a balanced thing--via preference. That is, what if Te and Fi, or any of the other pairs, are not pairs, but instead they are exaggerations, distortions, extreme perspectives placed on things that, somehow, are the same thing?

What same thing? Dunno.

But why suggest the pairs might somehow be not pairs but somehow "the same thing"? Because I look around and it seems to me that inferior and tertiary, but particularly inferior, functions have an essential role in the life of the top two functions. Like, it seems that Ni really can't exist without Se. How could it? With no information coming in about what things look like moment to moment, how is there anything at all for Ni to sit back and process? Likewise, Ne and Si, if there is no library of at least some basic steadfast unchanging well known and detailed information, how is Ne to propose its wild possibilities? And maybe likewise Te+Fi and Ti+Fe, but I haven't thought how to make that seem plausible yet.

I would say that each of these function pairs represent two ends of the same spectrum. Let's say I describe each pair in terms of its extraverted function:

The Se-Ni pair describes how in tune the person is with his present reality. A person on the far Se end focuses his attention on things which can be observed in the present reality. A person on the far Ni end will be divorced from the present reality and instead imagine things which seem wildly original and they will also see time more as a giant continuum rather than the present moment of time.

The Ne-Si pair describes how receptive a person is to new possibilities. A person on the far Ne side will be receptive to a wide variety of possibilities and will actively imagine new possibilities. On the other hand a person at the far Si of the spectrum will feel most comfortable with the only possibility that is truly known which is that which conforms to experience of the past.

The Te-Fi pair describes to what degree a person judges based on external impersonal criteria. A person on the far Te side will judge almost solely based on external impersonal criteria. A person more on the Fi side will do the opposite which is judge based on internal and personal criteria, i.e. the person's own individual values.

The Fe-Ti pair describes to what degree a person judges based on criteria that is external but personal. So a person on the Fe side will judge things based on how it affects their relationships and will pay attention to the opinions of their friends. A person on the far Ti side will judge based on their own individual but impersonal reasoning process.

Also when I describe a spectrum I want to point out that each person is changing which part of the spectrum they want to be on at any point. Take the Ni-Se spectrum for example. An ISTP trying to reason through a problem (Ti) would prefer to look at the obvious facts (Se) and if that approach wasn't fruitful then they would begin imagining different scenarios (Ni) until they stumbled upon one that made sense. They start near Se side of the spectrum and move toward Ni. An ENTJ's reasoning by contrast would start by imagining different scenarios, and if that was unfruitful then they would start looking to their immediate environment to enlighten their reasoning process. "Aha! Why didn't I see it before? The answer was right in front of me."
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Which sort of suggests one can scoot backward and forward along their spectrum, mixing, perhaps even melding, information gathering styles. My experience of Ni/Se is that one tends to cut out the other. But...say, riding along on a bicycle and being entertained by sensory information, Ni may take over and start cogitating on stuff. Not completely take over, because I don't fall off the bike having not noticed a parked car or something, but take over in the sense that it steers attention away from scenery and back to a bunch of other stuff I might be thinking about wherever I found myself. The Ni is not immediately stimulated by Se input, usually. Sometimes it can be, and Ni acts like a weak Ne, playing momentary catch up with Se, like seeing the smile on someones face and making an interpretation. But usually not. Ni's not that immediately responsive a process.

So I guess the spectrum idea sounds okay if one remembers that an i function isn't in the moment. It's got a backlog of stuff to deal with first, I guess.

Or has it? Casting an i function as a thing with a backlog makes it sound like Si. Where otherwise does the stuff of the i function get stored?


Ack! I just confused myself. All i functions are alike in that their subject matter is internal, but that needn't mean all i functions have some kind of de facto memory.



Si is my eight function. I ought to have the memory of a goldfish. How come I don't? I know past events fade really quickly as matters of concern, but stuff stays in my thinking/i-perceiving processes for a long while, so...
 

Matthew_Z

That chalkboard guy
Joined
Jun 15, 2009
Messages
1,256
MBTI Type
xxxx
Si is my eight function. I ought to have the memory of a goldfish. How come I don't? I know past events fade really quickly as matters of concern, but stuff stays in my thinking/i-perceiving processes for a long while, so...
You've almost answered your own question in the previous part of your post. Si and Ni don't interact the same way Ni and Se do. Both being Pi functions, they have a similar orientation, but a different approach. In the psyche, they would let some change modes of thinking while still remaining in a realm of comfort and familiarity. Don't get too caught up in a more traditional interpretation of the 1-8 system. 5 doesn't relate to 4 like 4 does to 3. For an accurate visual model, think of the sets 1-4 and 5-8 as stacking on top of each other, not one following.
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
You've almost answered your own question in the previous part of your post. Si and Ni don't interact the same way Ni and Se do. Both being Pi functions, they have a similar orientation, but a different approach. In the psyche, they would let some change modes of thinking while still remaining in a realm of comfort and familiarity. Don't get too caught up in a more traditional interpretation of the 1-8 system. 5 doesn't relate to 4 like 4 does to 3. For an accurate visual model, think of the sets 1-4 and 5-8 as stacking on top of each other, not one following.

8 can be like 4b?

Also, as I was writing Post #18 I knew I was making some obscuring error by identifying Si and memory.

But I am buggered if I know how and where I retain things. I used to say that the past exists in Ni as a bunch of ready inferences for the next future when events similar to past events arise again. But extracting the past back out of those Ni entities is middlin hard to nigh on impossible.


Hm, getting a sense of getting way of track here. The concepts are being either slippery or underdeveloped in my thinking.



Holy crap! If Ni and Se are linked, the shadows--Si and Ne--are hooked up to them too, unconscious ghostly things hanging around back? And the same for the other pairs too? What does that even mean?!?!
 
Top