[Fi] Describing INFP's Si Tertiary

[Mal12345]

While the rest of the forum is still trying to define for themselves the difference between Ni and Ne, I'd like to do a bit of discussing about Si tertiary.

Theory:

Si-tertiary is a characteristic of the INFP and INTP types, that is, those that have Ne-auxiliary. The tertiary of any type will be the exact opposite of the auxiliary of the dominant type.

Si-tertiary behaves differently depending on which of the two types is dominant. If Fi is dominant, then the Si-aux will show itself in ways that expresses the personal values (or as Carl Jung would say, the subjective values) of Fi. When I say personal or subjective values, I mean that these values were thought up by the valuing subject, not that they are subjectively random or arbitrary. This is in contrast to the Fe type for whom values are objective, socially derived and conforming to the values of the external individual or group.

Application:

The healthy INFP will be socially charming, outgoing (although in a self-adjusting way) as well as politically and socially conservative. This helps lend this subjectivist type a feeling of internal structure as well as a way to support his internal life through externalization of personal values, that is, a virtuous goal to achieve or cause to support. Thus there will be a sense of group or brand loyalty with this INFP, but not of the kind that expects loyalty in return in the healthy INFP. Since Si is a tertiary type, it won't be highly developed even when the INFP is healthy. So they will be loyalists to a fault, more-or-less self-defeating at it, only far less so than the unhealthy INFP. And so Si tertiary will cause the INFP to keep "taking it on the chin" and behaving like a lovable doormat long past the point where loyal devotedness should have ended. But the healthier the INFP, the more self-sacrificing he is in a way that makes him or her heroic in the eyes of others, although the healthy INFP remains ever humble, and humbled.

The average INFP is still charming and outgoing, but a certain manipulativeness is seen in this type. Having lost a certain amount of self-acceptance, this trait arises from a desire to be accepted by others. Average INFPs can use their innate understanding of how other people tick in ways that are less than healthy. Having lost self-esteem for whatever reason, the average INFP begins looking for self-worth in the eyes of others. The manipulativeness of the average INFP is a form of control over others which is enabled by Si-tertiary. The latter also arises to aid the INFP as he or she seeks security in the tribe or external cause. This is an anxious type, and manipulating (controlling) others while being other-determined keeps the anxiety at bay.

The unhealthy INFP has begun to lose all self-acceptance while at the same time demanding acceptance from others. Si-tertiary begins to turn toward outright hostility as a form of controlling others and away from the mere manipulativeness of the average INFP.

 

[Mal12345]

36 views, no replies. Apparently those views are just quick glances and then browsing away to find something shorter and easier to read here.

 

[skylights]

Or perhaps they simply have no comment they desire to share. No need to insult.

I have a number of thoughts...

First, I am not sure I understand what you mean by a healthy INFP being socially and politically conservative. If you mean in views, I don't know why their type preferences would necessarily fill that content in for them. Type is more about form than content. If you mean in terms of being relatively reserved in both social and political action, then I tend to agree, though I think it is common for them to have a few causes about which they tend to be more outspoken and active.

I do agree that average INFPs can be manipulative in terms of seeking affirmation from others, but I would not tend to use the word control - I do not think the average NFP tends to seek explicit control, finding it stressful to maintain. Rather, I think there is just a push to hear from others that they are worthwhile, because the amount of subjectivity and abstraction in the INFP's mindset makes it difficult to feel certain of static external attributes, like other people liking them, and as a consequence of the "floatiness" of their inner world, they seek periodic reinforcement. I think stronger Si usage can help ameliorate this tendency, creating more static perceptions for the INFP to rely on.

In addition to these facets, I think Si plays a huge part in Fi development and implementation, in terms of how INFPs decide what they value and how to recreate the conditions for it in their life. I think many INFPs and some ENFPs - and NTPs as well - also have a surprising touch of nostalgia and stubbornness for what they know, in contrast to Ne novelty seeking. I think in the introverted types, it comes out as a sort of stasis, a tendency towards inertia unless pushed strongly otherwise. I see it frequently in both my INTP father and myself. We are both novelty seekers in some senses, and surprisingly resistant to change in others.

As a slightly off-topic aside,

in my understanding, Fe type's values are more complex than conforming to the external... Fe as a function will tend to account for and utilize the values in its people environment because Fe works to modify existing external structures, just like Te. However, the Fe user themself can easily and almost always does have personal, subjectively developed values. They just will not tend to assert those bluntly without regard for context, like the FP is wont to do, and will instead try to find more tactful ways of guiding others towards the "better paths" as laid out by Ni or Si perception.

 

[Mal12345]

Or perhaps they simply have no comment they desire to share. No need to insult.

I don't see that as insulting, I'm just disgusted with how quiet this forum is most of the time when it comes to intelligent typological discussion.

I have a number of thoughts...

First, I am not sure I understand what you mean by a healthy INFP being socially and politically conservative. If you mean in views, I don't know why their type preferences would necessarily fill that content in for them. Type is more about form than content. If you mean in terms of being relatively reserved in both social and political action, then I tend to agree, though I think it is common for them to have a few causes about which they tend to be more outspoken and active.

I was hoping someone would ask me about that. The INFP is not a radical type. So by "conservative" I really mean "mainstream," as it is a relaxed, go-with-the-flow type. An INFP would have to be seriously psychologically damaged to do anything like commit arson or something like that in support of a social cause. But they don't typically "own" the negative and destructive aspects of their psyches. A typical blow-up only lasts a few seconds to a few minutes, after which they're like, "Uh, that wasn't me you just saw," or "that person you just saw is not who I am." Distancing themselves from these negatives is a way of protecting their self-esteem from cognitive dissonance and the negative views of those who psychologically support them.

I do agree that average INFPs can be manipulative in terms of seeking affirmation from others, but I would not tend to use the word control - I do not think the average NFP tends to seek explicit control,

That would be the unhealthy INFP, as stated in the OP. Explicit controlling would occur during something that could be called a psychotic episode or maybe even a fugue, because explicit control over others goes so far against their self-image and the image of themselves they wish to see reflected in the eyes of others.

finding it stressful to maintain. Rather, I think there is just a push to hear from others that they are worthwhile, because the amount of subjectivity and abstraction in the INFP's mindset makes it difficult to feel certain of static external attributes, like other people liking them, and as a consequence of the "floatiness" of their inner world, they seek periodic reinforcement. I think stronger Si usage can help ameliorate this tendency, creating more static perceptions for the INFP to rely on.

In addition to these facets, I think Si plays a huge part in Fi development and implementation, in terms of how INFPs decide what they value and how to recreate the conditions for it in their life. I think many INFPs and some ENFPs - and NTPs as well - also have a surprising touch of nostalgia and stubbornness for what they know, in contrast to Ne novelty seeking. I think in the introverted types, it comes out as a sort of stasis, a tendency towards inertia unless pushed strongly otherwise. I see it frequently in both my INTP father and myself. We are both novelty seekers in some senses, and surprisingly resistant to change in others.

Thanks, I love everything you're saying here. STASIS is a particularly important concept as, in the logical scheme of things, a complete stasis is where all mental disease ends up. A real example of that would be the business owner who worked for 30 years straight without a day off or vacation, and then one morning he woke up and found that he could not will his legs to move to get out of bed. (That would especially suck if he had to go to the bathroom really bad.) In terms of Fi, it means a complete lack of feeling-values where the motivator that keeps the INFP's value system in motion completely stops, due perhaps to some emotional trauma or complete emotional fatigue resulting in a major depressive episode.

As a slightly off-topic aside,

in my understanding, Fe type's values are more complex than conforming to the external... Fe as a function will tend to account for and utilize the values in its people environment because Fe works to modify existing external structures, just like Te. However, the Fe user themself can easily and almost always does have personal, subjectively developed values. They just will not tend to assert those bluntly without regard for context, like the FP is wont to do, and will instead try to find more tactful ways of guiding others towards the "better paths" as laid out by Ni or Si perception.

It's always healthy to develop the shadow opposite of a type, that is, the type that has the opposing attitude, as Fe to Fi and vice versa. You will also find that, in practice, people sense their shadow opposite in others and react against it. A Te bully may see a Ti as a weakling, because that's the part of the bully that he fears most in himself. In a lesser known way, the Fe can also be a bully against the Fi for similar although more social reasons. The Fi may not be socially conforming enough, or perhaps he or she is part of some oddball element in society that the Fe type finds distasteful.

 

[Arctic Hysteria]

The INFP is not a radical type. So by "conservative" I really mean "mainstream," as it is a relaxed, go-with-the-flow type.

Could you explain a bit more about this?

 

[Mal12345]

Could you explain a bit more about this?

Do you have a specific question I can try to answer? What do you mean by "this"?

 

[Arctic Hysteria]

Do you have a specific question I can to answer? What do you mean by "this"?

Your statement that I quoted.

 

[Mal12345]

Your statement that I quoted.

What about it did you have in mind?

 

[Arctic Hysteria]

What about it did you have in mind?

I'm just trying to understand more about how INFPs are theoretically described here in this area alone.

 

[Mal12345]

I'm just trying to understand more about how INFPs are theoretically described here in this area alone.

From the OP: "Si-aux will show itself in ways that express the personal values (or as Carl Jung would say, the subjective values) of Fi." What is Si in general? It is a subjective-sensation function, meaning that the sensations (which aren't emotions) have an internal source, a kind of "sixth sense" if you will. (An objective-sensation source would be any of the usual five senses.)

Objective reality is imbued by Si with subjective sensations and the meanings that are attached to them. These meanings have a concrete, symbolic, representational reference point. A good example would be those who see representations of Jesus in burnt pieces of toast.
22 People Who Found Jesus In Their Food
It's not that others wouldn't be able to see the pictures of Jesus, but they would have no symbolical reference for them as subjective (i.e., religious) truths. And such truths will be considered to be objective by Si because it doesn't in itself possess the ability to distinguish fact from fiction, just as, when we are asleep and dreaming, we naturally hold the dream we are in to be real until we wake up. This means that the more dominant the Si function is over the rational function, the more easily a person will be duped by faith healers and such. Where the rational function is stronger, or is dominant over the Si function, Si takes a subordinate role in searching for objective meaning, and Si becomes merely a subjective source of information that it really is. Subjective sensations are then reduced to the level of mere fascination with or intense interest in symbols. They are not confused with the objectively real.

The INFP won't usually be aware of the role that Si-tertiary takes in his or her subconscious dealings with their subjective values, so there is no way for the INFP to know that Si is in some unconscious way determining his or her value-judgments. INFPs layer over objective reality some subjectively-derived sensation-meaning which causes them to take things personally in an objective sense which, in reality, were not meant to be taken personally at all. The personal value-meaning of the Fi is subconsciously imbued with a sensation-meaning that has objective reality to the INFP. For example, the INFP may be a champion of certain social causes, where insulting the social cause will be taken as a personal insult by the INFP.

 

[Mal12345]

This incident occurred on Facebook right after I posted the above:

Me posting a comment on something I posted to my newsfeed: Why is it impossible to escape from a black hole? Because once you go black you never go back.

INFP friend suddenly PMs me:
Why would you post that crap on my page?

ME: what crap?

INFP: I do not wish to have racial comments on my page

ME: why not? and anyway, I posted it to my time line

INFP: Oh. My mistake actually

ME: i haven't messed with your page in a long time
besides, that joke was taken from a conversation with a black physicist
that i found on youtube

INFP: Yeah I don't judge where it came from or the motive, I just don't want it
My apologies for misconstruing where it was posted

ME: apology accepted


Notice he said "racial" not "racist." In the past I've seen that he champions race causes. Si's knee-jerk reaction distorted his thinking into believing that the joke was intended to be personal, posted to his page as some kind of personal attack, even though he's not black.

On the other hand, I have another (non-deaf) INFP friend who champions the cause of hearing-impairedness. I can post racial jokes to him all I want, and he'll laugh. But I'm not allowed to make any jokes about deaf people, even though he's not deaf, because he identifies with the deaf community.

 

[TaylorS]

Socially and politically conservative? I'm a freaking COMMUNIST, dude.

 

[INTP]

Psycholically developed INFP can differentiate between Si and Fi so that they arent tied together so much.

 

[reckful]

I don't see that as insulting, I'm just disgusted with how quiet this forum is most of the time when it comes to intelligent typological discussion.

The idea that IN_P's have an "Si" tertiary — and that makes them similar to SJs in ways that NJs and SPs are not — comes from the silly Harold Grant functions model. And for what it's worth, that model is inconsistent with both Jung and Myers.

But more important than its inconsistency with Jung and Myers (neither of whom was perfect): If that model had any freaking validity at all, there would be pools of data — already! in the decades of data pools that the MBTI folks and independent researchers have gathered — where the relevant correlations had to do with things significantly affected by "Si/Ne vs. Se/Ni," with the result that the SJs and NPs (the "Si/Ne" types) were together on one side of the results and the NJs and SPs (the "Se/Ni" types) were together on the other side.

But that's virtually never the way any MBTI-related data pool looks. There is absolutely no respectable body of support for the tertiary-function aspect of the Harold Grant model.

And if you think about it from a theoretical standpoint, that's really not too surprising, right? Start with an INFP. If you flip the N, you get an ISFP, and they're different from INFPs in various ways as a result, right? Now go back to the INFP and flip the P and you get an INFJ, and they're different from INFPs in various ways as a result, right? Now go back to the INFP and flip both the N and the P. Why would you expect the resulting ISFJ (with two preferences flipped) to be more like the INFP than either the ISFP or INFJ (each of whom has just one preference flipped) are? It seems kind of counterintuitive, doesn't it?

Now, just because a theory is counterintuitive doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true. Buuut in this case, on top of being counterintuitive, the fact is that that's just not how the MBTI dimensions actually play out in real people in the real world.

In the spoiler are membership stats for TC and PerC.

August 2012 membership stats for TypologyCentral:

INTP 17%
INFP 17%
INFJ 16%
INTJ 12%
ENFP 10%
ENTP 8%
ISTP 4%
ENFJ 3%
ENTJ 3%
ISFP 3%
ISTJ 2%
ISFJ 1%
ESTP 1%
ESFP 1%
ESTJ 1%
ESFJ 1%

June 2013 membership stats for PersonalityCafe:

INFP 3723 — 21%
INFJ 2580 — 15%
INTP 2228 — 13%
INTJ 1876 — 11%
ENFP 1352 — 8%
ENTP 1112 — 6%
ENFJ 514 — 3%
ISTP 527 — 3%
ISFP 506 — 3%
ISTJ 437 — 2%
ENTJ 401 — 2%
ISFJ 314 — 2%
ESTP 159 — 1%
ESFJ 102 — 1%
ESFP 117 — 1%
ESTJ 97 — 1%

You couldn't ask for a much better set of results, from the standpoint of the validity of the MBTI dichotomies, than those forum type frequencies. The MBTI doesn't ask people if they use internet forums (or the internet), and it doesn't ask them if they're interested in personality (or psychology). But the type frequency pattern at both forums (involving relatively large samples) is almost perfectly in line with a type-related explanation that says that (1) an N preference has a very large impact on the likelihood that someone will participate in personality-related internet forums, and (2) introversion also has a substantial impact (but not as large as an N preference).

But from the standpoint of the functions? The top four types are the INs, and they make up 62% of TC's members and 60% of PerC's members (but less than 12% of the general population), and they're a tidy foursome from a dichotomy-centric perspective, but they have three different dominant functions (Ni, Ti and Fi). Good luck coming up with any function-based set of influences on MBTI forum membership that does nearly as good a job of explaining the frequencies as the obvious dichotomy-based explanation.

In any case, and more generally, I'm here to tell you that I will be very surprised if you or any other Fi-Ne-Si-Te function-model aficionado can point me to any set of data where — because Si vs. Se (and/or Ni vs. Ne, and/or Si/Ne vs. Ni/Se) is the relevant personality component coming into play (with respect to political conservatism or anything else) — the NPs and SJs are together on one side of the spectrum and the NJs and SPs are together on the other. Instead, if the data pool is one where the NPs are at or near one end of the spectrum, you can pretty reliably expect to find the SJs at or near the other end.

And so, in conclusion, and returning to the part of your post that I quoted: Discussion of the "tertiary Si" of an INFP doesn't really qualify as "intelligent typological discussion." You might as well be talking about somebody's zodiac sign.

 

[Mal12345]

The idea that IN_P's have an "Si" tertiary — and that makes them similar to SJs in ways that NJs and SPs are not — comes from the silly Harold Grant functions model. And for what it's worth, that model is inconsistent with both Jung and Myers.

I have never heard of Harold Grant or his "silly" theory. However, I am not against "silly" theories or the inconsistencies they have with "non-silly" theories because those are other theories. Theories are going to be inconsistent with each other. But as long as the theory is not inconsistent WITHIN itself then I'll open-mindedly consider it.

But more important than its inconsistency with Jung and Myers (neither of whom was perfect): If that model had any freaking validity at all, there would be pools of data — already! in the decades of data pools that the MBTI folks and independent researchers have gathered — where the relevant correlations had to do with things significantly affected by "Si/Ne vs. Se/Ni," with the result that the SJs and NPs (the "Si/Ne" types) were together on one side of the results and the NJs and SPs (the "Se/Ni" types) were together on the other side.

But that's virtually never the way any MBTI-related data pool looks. There is absolutely no respectable body of support for the tertiary-function aspect of the Harold Grant model.

I'm skeptical about what is considered "respectable" or not. Euclidean geometry was considered respectable for over two thousand years until it was finally proven wrong. Euclidean geometry is true in a sense, but only if you consider it as true in itself, via imagining a perfectly flat plane that doesn't exist in reality.
The danger is assuming that the real world corresponds to this geometrical imagining. In terms of JCF or MBTI, or Harold Grant, the danger is in imagining that people correspond to the theory based on real data that has been shaped to conform with the imaginary system.

The latter is why some typologists consider JCF and MBTI to be unscientific.

And if you think about it from a theoretical standpoint, that's really not too surprising, right? Start with an INFP. If you flip the N, you get an ISFP, and they're different from INFPs in various ways as a result, right? Now go back to the INFP and flip the P and you get an INFJ, and they're different from INFPs in various ways as a result, right? Now go back to the INFP and flip both the N and the P. Why would you expect the resulting ISFJ (with two preferences flipped) to be more like the INFP than either the ISFP or INFJ (each of whom has just one preference flipped) are? It seems kind of counterintuitive, doesn't it?

Now, just because a theory is counterintuitive doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true. Buuut in this case, on top of being counterintuitive, the fact is that that's just not how the MBTI dimensions actually play out in real people in the real world.

My purpose is to resolve inconsistencies between theory and reality. What reality? Mine. My reality. The reality of people around me, either now or in the past. I'm not considering them in terms of how they conform to theory, but in terms of how their behavior does not conform to theory. I don't intend to knock down Jung - I don't have that much chutzpah - but simply to add to it. If nobody believes me, then so be it. I'll just carry on as usual because nobody can tell ME how I am supposed to think, not Jung, not Rand, not Kant, not my parents, not forum members - NOBODY.

In the spoiler are membership stats for TC and PerC.

August 2012 membership stats for TypologyCentral:

INTP 17%
INFP 17%
INFJ 16%
INTJ 12%
ENFP 10%
ENTP 8%
ISTP 4%
ENFJ 3%
ENTJ 3%
ISFP 3%
ISTJ 2%
ISFJ 1%
ESTP 1%
ESFP 1%
ESTJ 1%
ESFJ 1%

June 2013 membership stats for PersonalityCafe:

INFP 3723 — 21%
INFJ 2580 — 15%
INTP 2228 — 13%
INTJ 1876 — 11%
ENFP 1352 — 8%
ENTP 1112 — 6%
ENFJ 514 — 3%
ISTP 527 — 3%
ISFP 506 — 3%
ISTJ 437 — 2%
ENTJ 401 — 2%
ISFJ 314 — 2%
ESTP 159 — 1%
ESFJ 102 — 1%
ESFP 117 — 1%
ESTJ 97 — 1%

You couldn't ask for a much better set of results, from the standpoint of the validity of the MBTI dichotomies, than those forum type frequencies. The MBTI doesn't ask people if they use internet forums (or the internet), and it doesn't ask them if they're interested in personality (or psychology). But the type frequency pattern at both forums (involving relatively large samples) is almost perfectly in line with a type-related explanation that says that (1) an N preference has a very large impact on the likelihood that someone will participate in personality-related internet forums, and (2) introversion also has a substantial impact (but not as large as an N preference).

But from the standpoint of the functions? The top four types are the INs, and they make up 62% of TC's members and 60% of PerC's members (but less than 12% of the general population), and they're a tidy foursome from a dichotomy-centric perspective, but they have three different dominant functions (Ni, Ti and Fi). Good luck coming up with any function-based set of influences on MBTI forum membership that does nearly as good a job of explaining the frequencies as the obvious dichotomy-based explanation.

In any case, and more generally, I'm here to tell you that I will be very surprised if you or any other Fi-Ne-Si-Te function-model aficionado can point me to any set of data where — because Si vs. Se (and/or Ni vs. Ne, and/or Si/Ne vs. Ni/Se) is the relevant personality component coming into play (with respect to political conservatism or anything else) — the NPs and SJs are together on one side of the spectrum and the NJs and SPs are together on the other. Instead, if the data pool is one where the NPs are at or near one end of the spectrum, you can pretty reliably expect to find the SJs at or near the other end.

And so, in conclusion, and returning to the part of your post that I quoted: Discussion of the "tertiary Si" of an INFP doesn't really qualify as "intelligent typological discussion." You might as well be talking about somebody's zodiac sign.

Okay, then let's discuss astrology. It's all good fun.