• 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.

Holy crap!--the orientation of the tertiary?!

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
The MBTI Manual as it stands, 3rd edition, revised 2003, printed 2009, and Isabel Myers Briggs Gifts Differing, revised 1995, take what was apparently Jung's view on the tertiary function, that it, just like the auxiliary and the inferior, is opposite in orientation to the dominant function!

So now I'm puzzled. See, I believe the more current understanding (which comes from where?--I don't know), that the functions alternate orientation as one moves down the order. And I assume this is a relatively new idea. I for one forget where I read it and why I accepted it other than that it seems true. But what in sweet jesus blessed name does this mean for the type descriptions? They're all based on Izzie's ideas!

Who developed the idea of alternating orientations? How long has it been around? Are MBTI practitioners really walking around using the old type dynamics model?
 

purplesunset

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
113
Enneagram
4w5
The MBTI Manual as it stands, 3rd edition, revised 2003, printed 2009, and Isabel Myers Briggs Gifts Differing, revised 1995, take what was apparently Jung's view on the tertiary function, that it, just like the auxiliary and the inferior, is opposite in orientation to the dominant function!

So now I'm puzzled. See, I believe the more current understanding (which comes from where?--I don't know), that the functions alternate orientation as one moves down the order. And I assume this is a relatively new idea. I for one forget where I read it and why I accepted it other than that it seems true. But what in sweet jesus blessed name does this mean for the type descriptions? They're all based on Izzie's ideas!

Who developed the idea of alternating orientations? How long has it been around? Are MBTI practitioners really walking around using the old type dynamics model?

I know it looks intimidating, but if you actually read through my LONG DIATRIBE (click here) , I try to show why the i and e rotate like that.

Yes it is confusing, because Jung originally had the tertiary as the opposite orientation as the dominant, but apparently [someone] made it to be the same orientation as the dominant because the tertiary became the opposite of the auxiliary.

This stuff actually makes much more sense to me now, but I'm afraid I might not be doing a good job of explaining it. Blame it on my Ni :doh: which makes it clear to me internally, but has trouble explaining it to another.
 

Moiety

New member
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
5,996
MBTI Type
ISFJ
NeFiTiSi might explain a lot...at least it validates my use of Ti.


I always thought that function theory didn't neatly fit with the four letter dichotomies. This is my problem with systems and too rigidly following them. Perception changes so much...and it's so easy to adapt our explanations if we really want to.
 

JocktheMotie

Habitual Fi LineStepper
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,491
I'd need to read some of these books or what have you to give any kind of analysis. Anything online?
 

nightning

ish red no longer *sad*
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,741
MBTI Type
INfj
Huh, that's interesting. I shall be a misfit. I wonder who changed the ordering around... because that was how I've always thought the theory should be.
 

sofmarhof

New member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
327
MBTI Type
INTP
I don't care so much what Jung originally said, if what he said wasn't right. Si definitely works for me.
 

Laurie

Was E.laur
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
6,072
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
7w6
NeFiTiSi might explain a lot...at least it validates my use of Ti.

I'm not overly familiar with functions but I identify with Ti as I've seen it explained.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
From Wikipedia:

Orientation of the tertiary function
Jung theorized that the dominant function acts alone in its preferred world: exterior for the extraverts, and interior for the introverts. The remaining three functions, he suggested, operate together in the opposite world. If the dominant cognitive function is introverted, the other functions are extraverted, and vice versa. The MBTI Manual summarizes references in Jung's work to the balance in psychological type as follows:

There are several references in Jung's writing to the three remaining functions having an opposite attitudinal character. For example, in writing about introverts with thinking dominant…Jung commented that the counterbalancing functions have an extraverted character.[15]:29
However, many MBTI practitioners hold that the tertiary function is oriented in the same direction as the dominant function.[23] Using the INTP type as an example, the orientation would be as follows:

Dominant introverted thinking
Auxiliary extraverted intuition
Tertiary introverted sensing
Inferior extraverted feeling
From a theoretical perspective, noted psychologist H.J. Eysenck calls the MBTI a moderately successful quantification of Jung's original principles as outlined in Psychological Types.[24] However, both models remain theory, with no controlled scientific studies supporting either Jung's original concept of type or the Myers-Briggs variation.[25]

And this on another page regarding "shadow functions"

Myers interpreted Jung as saying that the auxiliary, tertiary, and inferior functions are always in the opposite attitude of the dominant. In support of Myers' (and/or Briggs') interpretation, in one sentence Jung seems to state that the three inferior functions of an (extreme) extravert are introverted. The "most differentiated function is always employed in an extraverted way, whereas the inferior functions are introverted" (Jung, [1921] 1971:par. 575).

Many, however, have found Jung's writing to be ambiguous, and those who study and follow Jung's theories (Jungians) are typically adamant that Myers is incorrect.[citation needed] Jungians interpret Jung as explicitly stating that the tertiary function is actually in the same attitude as the dominant, providing balance.[citation needed] More recently, typologists such as John Beebe and Linda Berens have introduced theoretical systems in which all people possess eight functions -- equivalent to the four functions as defined by Jung and Myers but in each of the two possible attitudes -- with the four in the opposite attitude to that measured known as the "shadow functions," residing largely in the unconscious.

There is controversy even within the Center for Applications of Psychological Type (CAPT), co-founded by Myers, regarding the attitude of the tertiary relative to the dominant. "The MBTI Qualifying Program," a binder given out during official training, puts the tertiary in the opposite attitude to the dominant on page 13; however, "The Manual," which gives official instructions on how to use the test, has the tertiary in the same attitude on page 31. Dr. Charles Martin [1], ex-Vice President of research at CAPT, writes the following on page 22 of the binder, "In what attitude is the tertiary? Isabel Myers read Jung to say that the auxiliary, tertiary, and inferior are all in the same attitude and opposite the dominant. Others (Harold Grant) read: tertiary is in the same attitude as the dominant."

Jung began writing Psychological Types nearly 100 years ago. It is a great work and speaks to his genius in discovering cognitive functions that have stood the test of time, practice, and research by other social scientists. He opened the door into mind for us and gave the construct of archetypes of the psyche.

Except for Myers-Briggs, which is controversial itself, the whole field of personality archetypes has had little advancement, imo, since Jung's theories; and this applies to modern function theories as well. So to expect that one model applies to each archetype is just asking too much. You can expect the dom, and perhaps the aux, to fit well, and the rest is just up for grabs.

EDIT: Until much more testing is done on cognitive function on people irl.
 

EcK

The Memes Justify the End
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
7,708
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
738
I don't even UNDERSTAND fi ,even less have it
 

edcoaching

New member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
752
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
7
Actually, the most recent thought on the orientation of the tertiary is that it truly may vary from person to person, depending on their education/experiences/nurture/etc. There's a "Group That Must Not Be Named" until they're done that is looking at the issue in a bunch of new ways.

Never forget that Jung developed the theories through his own experiences and his work with patients whose type development wasn't necessarily normal. Myers did a ton of research (now in Step III) that gets at the development of the preferences and spent many more years on the theory than Jung did. Based on that research, she was predicting with 90% accuracy who would/wouldn't finish college; who would die shortly after med school and all kinds of other things--based on whether people showed signs of actually being able to use their preferences (having a preference isn't the same as having conscious, mature control of it, if you haven't noticed!!!)

So the jury is still out on the orientation of the third function. And not all the type descriptions deal at all with the orientation fo the third function, so don't worry too much. Most barely get past stereotypes of the first two. And most leave out the mounting evidence that the opposite orientation of the dominant function may actually develop in tandem with the dominant (like, Ne and Ni kinda together) although the dominant remains, well, dominant!! :D
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Actually, the most recent thought on the orientation of the tertiary is that it truly may vary from person to person, depending on their education/experiences/nurture/etc. There's a "Group That Must Not Be Named" until they're done that is looking at the issue in a bunch of new ways.

Never forget that Jung developed the theories through his own experiences and his work with patients whose type development wasn't necessarily normal. Myers did a ton of research (now in Step III) that gets at the development of the preferences and spent many more years on the theory than Jung did. Based on that research, she was predicting with 90% accuracy who would/wouldn't finish college; who would die shortly after med school and all kinds of other things--based on whether people showed signs of actually being able to use their preferences (having a preference isn't the same as having conscious, mature control of it, if you haven't noticed!!!)

So the jury is still out on the orientation of the third function. And not all the type descriptions deal at all with the orientation fo the third function, so don't worry too much. Most barely get past stereotypes of the first two. And most leave out the mounting evidence that the opposite orientation of the dominant function may actually develop in tandem with the dominant (like, Ne and Ni kinda together) although the dominant remains, well, dominant!! :D


*smug expression*
 

Kalach

Filthy Apes!
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
4,310
MBTI Type
INTJ
Actually, the most recent thought on the orientation of the tertiary is that it truly may vary from person to person, depending on their education/experiences/nurture/etc. There's a "Group That Must Not Be Named" until they're done that is looking at the issue in a bunch of new ways.

That's.... just... oh noes!

Okay... maybe preference isn't as determinant as one could hope for a nice model theory. But still, how to tell the difference between actual functions present and developed skills? Delve into the subconscious, I guess. That's interesting, though.

And most leave out the mounting evidence that the opposite orientation of the dominant function may actually develop in tandem with the dominant (like, Ne and Ni kinda together) although the dominant remains, well, dominant!! :D

Is it more related to extraverts than introverts? Like, a dominant Ne allows a developing Ni, but dominant Ni is fairly difficult to reorient? Because I can mimic Ne, and in my humble opinion it is mimicry rather than actual performance of a function I have--it's more like openning my eyes, and background Ni can supply a lot of mystical insight seemingly in the moment off the back of normal Se, but really it's just accessing the Ni library, not making new connections per se.

Or is it?

Freakin' Jesus, what's the difference between modeling a function and actually having it operational in ones psyche?
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Is it more related to extraverts than introverts? Like, a dominant Ne allows a developing Ni, but dominant Ni is fairly difficult to reorient? Because I can mimic Ne, and in my humble opinion it is mimicry rather than actual performance of a function I have--it's more like openning my eyes, and background Ni can supply a lot of mystical insight seemingly in the moment off the back of normal Se, but really it's just accessing the Ni library, not making new connections per se.

Or is it?

Freakin' Jesus, what's the difference between modeling a function and actually having it operational in ones psyche?

Jeesuz is right. Did you ever think you are not 'mimicing' anything and that you are really using Ne? Why do you guys try to twist everything up to fit function theories instead of accepting the obvious? :jesus:
 

jenocyde

half mystic, half skeksis
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
6,387
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
7w8
I don't think anyone really knows for sure what is mimicking and what is real and what is obvious to another person. Sometimes I think I'm mimicking Fe because it's calculated and it's not natural. But that may actually *be* Fe according to some because the mere fact that I mimic it means I have a need to express it. Perhaps. Who knows... All of these theories remain theories. Interesting, yes - but theories just the same.

I have been reading this thread actively (and that other one) and have spotted so many flags that seem questionable in every argument, but it's nice to see that everyone has theories and opinions on the subject - it's been a fun read. Wonder if we'll ever know for sure...
 

purplesunset

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
113
Enneagram
4w5
Jeesuz is right. Did you ever think you are not 'mimicing' anything and that you are really using Ne? Why do you guys try to twist everything up to fit function theories instead of accepting the obvious? :jesus:

Because doing so would admit the shortcomings of the current functions order theory and blow up the whole MBTI party.

People will probably feel threatened or like they're wasting their time on a board like this if the whole thing is revealed to be more random than rational.

Personally, I don't look at it that way. I love to scrutinize it, see the confusions, try to understand why they happen, then attempt to clarify them. If that would involve refining the theory, then so be it.
 

purplesunset

New member
Joined
Aug 21, 2009
Messages
113
Enneagram
4w5
I don't think anyone really knows for sure what is mimicking and what is real and what is obvious to another person. Sometimes I think I'm mimicking Fe because it's calculated and it's not natural. But that may actually *be* Fe according to some because the mere fact that I mimic it means I have a need to express it. Perhaps. Who knows... All of these theories remain theories. Interesting, yes - but theories just the same.

I have been reading this thread actively and have spotted so many flags that seem questionable in every argument, but it's nice to see that everyone has theories and opinions on the subject - it's been a fun read. Wonder if we'll ever know for sure...



How come this thread is getting all the responses, while my poor little thread which addresses a similar issue is left alone, neglected, and forlorn in the dark ?:cry:

It's because the OP here is a regular, right? Darn you, board politics! I shake my fist at you, although my fist isn't exactly the most threatening-looking fist. My hands are a pianist's hands.
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Because doing so would admit the shortcomings of the current functions order theory and blow up the whole MBTI party.

People will probably feel threatened or like they're wasting their time on a board like this if the whole thing is revealed to be more random than rational.

Personally, I don't look at it that way. I love to scrutinize it, see the confusions, try to understand why they happen, then attempt to clarify them. If that would involve refining the theory, then so be it.

Well, in all fairness to MBTI, they only really state there are 4 main positions. It's the other theorists that go to the 8th extreme where it gets really sketchy, imo.

And it's cool they are doing more testing with Step II and Step III. They should. They are poised for easily gathering data on people when people take the MBTI tests.
 
Top