Why don't types like NeTe exist?

[SteinitzGamgbit]

Consider the following: why is it that people cannot have, say, TeFi; NeSi; FeFi; TeNe; etc; as their two dominant functions (if that's how you call them)?
To me, it seems that your first function will be any of the all existing and the second one will be the opposite version of your first (that is, if your first function is introverted, the second will be extraverted, and the other way arround). And besides, the second function will be of a different spectre of the first one. Ergo, if the first function is of the T/F spectrum, the second function will be mandatorily of the S/N spectrum. And the other way arround. So why does this happen? By default, an ENTP goes a bit like this: Ne>Ti>Fe>Si. Do people that have it Ne>Te>Fi>Si exist? Another example of what I mean: let's imagine your typical INFJ (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se). What if, for some reason, it happens that he gets it Ni;Ti;Fe;Se? So yeah. Please explain.

 

[AphroditeGoneAwry]

Consider the following: why is it that people cannot have, say, TeFi; NeSi; FeFi; TeNe; etc; as their two dominant functions (if that's how you call them)?
To me, it seems that your first function will be any of the all existing and the second one will be the opposite version of your first (that is, if your first function is introverted, the second will be extraverted, and the other way arround). And besides, the second function will be of a different spectre of the first one. Ergo, if the first function is of the T/F spectrum, the second function will be mandatorily of the S/N spectrum. And the other way arround. So why does this happen? By default, an ENTP goes a bit like this: Ne>Ti>Fe>Si. Do people that have it Ne>Te>Fi>Si exist? Another example of what I mean: let's imagine your typical INFJ (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se). What if, for some reason, it happens that he gets it Ni;Ti;Fe;Se? So yeah. Please explain.

Hi.

As I was discussing in my thread about being officially typed as an INTP, sometimes under stress in our developmental years, extraversion or introversion might be forced upon us causing our functions to bend in a way they were not originally intended to bend.

I think this usually occurs toward introversion, but there might be cases where children are forced into extraversion as well.

Perceiving functions work well with judging functions, so that is why there is P/J and J/P usually working together.

Also, we would assume most of the time the dominant function remains intact no matter what the environment is like, but that might not necessarily be true. The dominant function could also become bent the 'wrong' or unintended way. I believe people are born with a natural set of cognitive functions obtained from their birth parents. Part of their genes. But nurture can cause these functions to change, and does. Giving us all manner of expression.

 

[pizzathegreat]

This will be rather rushed, but hopefully I can make my point:

Te-Ne, Ne-Fe, Ni-Ti, Fi-Si types exist in loops. They're able to work because they're not necessarily opposites that have to balance each other like Je-Pi or Pe-Ji.

Having a Te-Fi-X-X stack wouldn't work though. People with dominant Te favor it heavily over Fi. When Te-Fi are aux-tert they're a bit more balanced, though Te will still usually be prioritized.

Another point to make is that Te-Fi are both Judging functions(same goes for Fe-Ti). Perceiving functions take in data and judging functions make decisions with data. Only one of these functions will get prioritized as dominant(if you're a J type).


Judging functions:

• Te (Je)
• Ti (Ji)
• Fe (Je)
• Fi (Ji)

Perceiving functions:

• Se (Pe)
• Si (Pi)
• Ne (Pe)
• Ni (Pi)

Axes:

• Te-Fi / Fi-Te
• Fe-Ti / Ti-Fe
• Ne-Si / Si-Ne
• Se-Ni / Ni-Se

Introvert Stacks:
IxxJ - Pi - Je - Ji - Pe
IxxP - Ji - Pe - Pi - Je

Extrovert Stacks:
ExxJ - Je - Pi - Pe - Ji
ExxP - Pe - Ji - Je - Pi


This is why loops can work (Te-Ne, Ne-Fe, Ni-Ti, Fi-Si,etc). The functions are directed at the same place(objective/outer or subjective/inner world / I or E), but one is still judging and the other is perceiving. Te-Ne (Je-Pe) Ni-Ti (Pi-Ji)

 

[SteinitzGamgbit]

This is why loops can work (Te-Ne, Ne-Fe, Ni-Ti, Fi-Si,etc). The functions are directed at the same place(objective/outer or subjective/inner world / I or E), but one is still judging and the other is perceiving. Te-Ne (Je-Pe) Ni-Ti (Pi-Ji)

Then what do we call them? Disabled people? Mentally sick? Geniuses?
Would a NeTe be an ENTP or ENTJ? Would a TeNe be an ENTP or ENTJ?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Look into Socionics Model G. In that system, ENTP could be interpreted as a NeTe type at long range, with the Ti only becoming apparent at closer proximity.

 

[pizzathegreat]

Then what do we call them? Disabled people? Mentally sick? Geniuses?
Would a NeTe be an ENTP or ENTJ? Would a TeNe be an ENTP or ENTJ?

Ne-Te would be ENFP (Ne-Fi-Te-Si). Te-Ne would be ESTJ (Te-Si-Ne-Fi). Loops essentially bypass the auxiliary function and use the dominant and tertiary. ENTJ (Te-Ni-Se-Fi) would be in a Te-Se loop if Ni was pushed below Se. Most people fall into a loop (or live in one) at some point, though it's recommended they use their actual aux function to get out of it.

So the traditional stack is:
Dominant - Auxiliary - Tertiary - Inferior
ESFP > Se - Fi - Te - Ni

And someone who is in a loop has a stack that looks something like this:
Dominant - Tertiary - Auxiliary - Inferior OR they ignore the Aux completely.
ESFP > Se - Te - Fi(?) - Ni

 

[SteinitzGamgbit]

Ne-Te would be ENFP (Ne-Fi-Te-Si). Te-Ne would be ESTJ (Te-Si-Ne-Fi). Loops essentially bypass the auxiliary function and use the dominant and tertiary. ENTJ (Te-Ni-Se-Fi) would be in a Te-Se loop if Ni was pushed below Se. Most people fall into a loop (or live in one) at some point, though it's recommended they use their actual aux function to get out of it.

So the traditional stack is:
Dominant - Auxiliary - Tertiary - Inferior
ESFP > Se - Fi - Te - Ni

And someone who is in a loop has a stack that looks something like this:
Dominant - Tertiary - Auxiliary - Inferior OR they ignore the Aux completely.
ESFP > Se - Te - Fi(?) - Ni

Figures. One last question, if you don't mind. Why do some types have their dominant as judging? If perceiving functions tend to analyse data and judging ones tend to take decisions, it seems only logical that you should first take in data to then make a decision, ergo, all types would have a dominant perceiving type rather than judging. What am I missing?

 

[entropie]

Why do you have to take in data to make a decision ? Look at dictators for a reference

 

[reckful]

Consider the following: why is it that people cannot have, say, TeFi; NeSi; FeFi; TeNe; etc; as their two dominant functions (if that's how you call them)?

Jung's function stack for an Ni-dom with a T-aux (for example) was Ni-Ti-Fe-Se.

Myers was the one who flipped the attitude of the auxiliary to the opposite of the dominant, and she said that was Jung's view, but she acknowledged that her interpretation ran contrary to the vast majority (all but one, she said) of Jung scholars, and she was just wrong on that score.

But Jung and Myers both agreed that the tertiary function would have the opposite attitude to the dominant in the typical case.

For more on Jung's stack, see this two-part post.

Besides being inconsistent with both Jung and Myers, the Harold Grant function stack — where an INTJ (for example) is supposedly Ni-Te-Fi-Se — has never been endorsed by the official MBTI folks, and more importantly (and unlike the dichotomies), it has no respectable body of evidence behind it, and if you want to read a lot more about that, see this post.

Finally, if you're interested in quite a bit more input from me on the relationship between the dichotomies and the functions, the place of the functions (or lack thereof) in the MBTI's history, and the tremendous gap between the dichotomies and the functions in terms of scientific respectability, you'll find a lot of potentially eye-opening discussion in this TC Wiki page and the posts it links to.

 

[Andy]

Consider the following: why is it that people cannot have, say, TeFi; NeSi; FeFi; TeNe; etc; as their two dominant functions (if that's how you call them)?
To me, it seems that your first function will be any of the all existing and the second one will be the opposite version of your first (that is, if your first function is introverted, the second will be extraverted, and the other way arround). And besides, the second function will be of a different spectre of the first one. Ergo, if the first function is of the T/F spectrum, the second function will be mandatorily of the S/N spectrum. And the other way arround. So why does this happen? By default, an ENTP goes a bit like this: Ne>Ti>Fe>Si. Do people that have it Ne>Te>Fi>Si exist? Another example of what I mean: let's imagine your typical INFJ (Ni, Fe, Ti, Se). What if, for some reason, it happens that he gets it Ni;Ti;Fe;Se? So yeah. Please explain.

First, it's important to realise that the function order isn't about function preference, but rather the role that the function plays. The auxiliary function is of opposite direction (introversion/extroversion) and type ( perceiving/judging) because that is what it needs to be in order to balance out the primary function. A double extroversion would lead to excess action without though. A double introversion is all thought and no action. A double judging function is all decisions with no information and a double perceiving is the reverse. Only when they is a mix of I, E and P and J in the first two functions can any sort of healthy, balance state be achieved.

In reality, many peoples function preference does not follow the function order - this does not change their type, only the way it is expressed. The greater the deviation, the more likely they are to be their own worst enemy.