[ENFP] The ENFP Te Demand

[Kalach]

This is a speculation. And it goes a little something like this:

The tertiary function--relief--we turn to it to find energy for and the recharging of whatever our higher functions are about. (Also we turn to it to let the pressure out of the demands of our higher functions, but that's another story.) And being relatively underdeveloped and less conscious than the higher functions, the relief function produces simple-minded demands about how things ought to be.

Take INTJs for instance. I know that having Fi under Te tends us toward simple-minded demands that other people have their moral compass on straight. "You will treat me with respect and you will know what respect is!"--that kind of thing. Vocalising about moral requirements. "You're going the wrong way! You're making the wrong choice! What do you really want!" And so on. It's odd, but it's true. "Everything will go better if the feeling is right, or I'm outta here!" If you look around the forum, you can see INTJs doing it all over the place.

So I have come to wonder, what does having Te under Fi do in ENFPs? Well, it's Te, so it'll be something about how the world will be organised; and it's in service of Ne/Fi, so...

The ENFP Te demand: "the world will be organised in such a way that people can interact and be at risk because I need them to take risks."

("And I'll be really sorry if you get hurt, but it's not my fault if you do get hurt because that's just the way the world is, you have to be responsible for yourself.")


Like I say, the demands imposed by the relief function are relatively simple-minded, and looked at in isolation, they sound awful, but the higher functions are there to take up the slack and balance out the awfulness. Like for example, ENFPs having Ne/Fi will be able to say, yeah, people are at risk, but I'm sympathetic and empathetic and I can be trusted not to hurt you. INTJs back up their Fi demand by saying, I will stand fast to my moral criterion and meanwhile I'll be organising the shit out of everything else so if you know what you want, you don't have to worry about me not knowing about everything else.


This is a first draft, it's a nice draft, but I don't know if it's a true draft. A lot of the claims might be wrong in expression and might need some whittlin'. What say you?

 

[SciVo]

The thing that jumps out at me is, what about people with an atypical tertiary, such as myself? Do you think that it's all about the Jungian complexes, and that every INFP would be considered in terms of a tertiary (albeit possibly very weak) Si? or that it's about the individual's actual strongest cognitive processes?

 

[Kalach]

Persons with atypical tertiaries are apostate. But the church forgives. If it's a real tertiary, it'll still produce a demand.

At least I suppose it will. That is, I know that typically INTJs have an Fi demand, but I have wondered if that's not the peculiar result of being both driven to organise and having less than totally conscious control over feeling. Maybe other types have less cranky tertiaries.


Come to think of it, I wonder if this whole topic isn't just a re-framing of "tertiary temptation" to make it sound more positive.

 

[SciVo]

Ah! Thanks for pointing me in that direction. Yes, from my quick research, an INTJ who gets forced outside of his I comfort zone while distrusting his secondary Te will be tempted to use (what is most likely) his Fi, just because it's not his suspicious Te and not his usual kind of I either.

If that theory makes sense, then it also explains why my Ni is so highly developed (less than 20% difference from my dominant Fi). I went for decades with a Fi that was kind of crippled by stress, and I recall that I used the Ne/Ni team extensively to try and compensate. Sometimes it would be genius, and sometimes... not.

 

[Wonkavision]

So I have come to wonder, what does having Te under Fi do in ENFPs? Well, it's Te, so it'll be something about how the world will be organised; and it's in service of Ne/Fi, so...

The ENFP Te demand: "the world will be organised in such a way that people can interact and be at risk because I need them to take risks."

("And I'll be really sorry if you get hurt, but it's not my fault if you do get hurt because that's just the way the world is, you have to be responsible for yourself.")

This sounds pretty accurate to me.

Most of the time, we are not being pulled in all directions by our different functions---they work together as a team.

But I would like to point out that using Tertiary functions can be a very risky business--especially when under stress.

Lenore Thomson and others have written in depth about a kind of "Tertiary Temptation", where one subordinates the aim of the crucial Secondary function to the goals of the Dominant and Tertiary functions.

It's tempting because it allows us to stay in our comfort zone---either Introversion or Extraversion---at the cost of losing much-needed balance.

Think of Frodo, in The Lord of the Rings.

His overall character is trustworthy. That's why he was chosen to carry the ring.
But he's still tempted to use the ring when he's overcome with fear, insecurity, and doubt.

That's what motivates us to rely on our weaker functions, or allows us to be overpowered by them.


It's nice to think of Tertiary functions as convenient helpers in times of need---that we can pick and choose when to use them, and that they will aid us in our overall objectives.

But if you consider the fact that our Tertiary functions have the same attitude (Introverted or Extraverted) as our Dominant functions---it's easy to see that they are not at all sufficient to balance our Dominant functions.

A dominant Extraverted function needs an Introverted perspective, and a dominant Intoverted function needs an Extraverted perspective.

Otherwise it's unbalanced, and even presents the danger of weaker functions taking over.


The solution Thomson and others recommend:
Focus on developing the Secondary function, and avoid "Tertiary Temptation."



In light of "Tertiary Temptation", I might change this:

The ENFP Te demand: "the world will be organised in such a way that people can interact and be at risk because I need them to take risks."

To this:

The ENFP Te demand: "the world will be organised in such a way that I can pursue my Intuitive goals without restraint, because people are actively trying to limit my potential, and I can prove it."


If an ENFP neglects secondary Fi and leans heavily on inferior Te to support Ne, he will be focused too much on externals and lack the balance provided by an introverted perspective.

This refusal to take responsibility for his own actions will leave the ENFP feeling controlled by other people and extremely dependent on the reactions of others to gauge how he is doing.

And since he is acting out of his inferior functions, he will feel vulnerable and insecure, which will cause him great distress.

He will be hypersensitive to the reactions of others, leading to a highly defensive posture and even more use of inferior functions to temporarily relieve anxiety.

This is what is commonly referred to as "blowing up", "spazzing out", "going beserk", "ranting", "raging", etc.--and once an ENFP is in the grip of inferior functions---no matter how accurate or logical his arguments are---his position is totally overshadowed by the extreme and dysfunctional behavior.

That is the high cost of his "Tertiary Temptation."


And all 16 types have their own version of this.

SPOOKY, isn't it????

 

[Amargith]

5 stars, absolutely love this topic.

Kalach, you read my mind. This was going to be my next project. Can't wait what kind of replies it generates

 

[Lady_X]

This is a speculation. And it goes a little something like this:

The tertiary function--relief--we turn to it to find energy for and the recharging of whatever our higher functions are about. (Also we turn to it to let the pressure out of the demands of our higher functions, but that's another story.) And being relatively underdeveloped and less conscious than the higher functions, the relief function produces simple-minded demands about how things ought to be.

Take INTJs for instance. I know that having Fi under Te tends us toward simple-minded demands that other people have their moral compass on straight. "You will treat me with respect and you will know what respect is!"--that kind of thing. Vocalising about moral requirements. "You're going the wrong way! You're making the wrong choice! What do you really want!" And so on. It's odd, but it's true. "Everything will go better if the feeling is right, or I'm outta here!" If you look around the forum, you can see INTJs doing it all over the place.

So I have come to wonder, what does having Te under Fi do in ENFPs? Well, it's Te, so it'll be something about how the world will be organised; and it's in service of Ne/Fi, so...

The ENFP Te demand: "the world will be organised in such a way that people can interact and be at risk because I need them to take risks."

("And I'll be really sorry if you get hurt, but it's not my fault if you do get hurt because that's just the way the world is, you have to be responsible for yourself.")


Like I say, the demands imposed by the relief function are relatively simple-minded, and looked at in isolation, they sound awful, but the higher functions are there to take up the slack and balance out the awfulness. Like for example, ENFPs having Ne/Fi will be able to say, yeah, people are at risk, but I'm sympathetic and empathetic and I can be trusted not to hurt you. INTJs back up their Fi demand by saying, I will stand fast to my moral criterion and meanwhile I'll be organising the shit out of everything else so if you know what you want, you don't have to worry about me not knowing about everything else.


This is a first draft, it's a nice draft, but I don't know if it's a true draft. A lot of the claims might be wrong in expression and might need some whittlin'. What say you?

i say...you's funny....it's so interesting these theories you people come up with...i guess that sounds right though to me...a lil something like freedom to your own experiences...but know yourself well enough not to screw it up but yeah...we all screw up...i get it...and it's okay...it's an important part of the process...so you'll be fine...and i'm here for you if you're not.

is that what you said? i think so...so yeah...sounds about right.

 

[lamp]

This topic . . . I approve. I will chime in, once I chew through some life-stuff.

 

[Kalach]

Jeez, I thought you guys would be pissed off. It seems to me the demand the relief function imposes, when spelled out, usually has some fairly unpleasant worst case scenarios for other people. This is perhaps something of the dark side of the user. And the user, to some degree, is right there in the middle of it finding ways to say it is good.

It seems like the relief function, by virtue of not being under too much conscious control, imposes requirements, yes, on the user, but also on other people who interact with the user, what they're supposed to accept and do to fit in with the workings of the higher functions of the first person. If the function were under more conscious control, the imposition could be relaxed, but as it is, it's just there keeping on keeping on, insisting on environments.

The balance, it seems, of a healthy, functioning top two functions, is a darker, less reasonable lower two functions.

 

[Amargith]

^ This is exactly why I cannot really contribute to this thread. I actively try to avoid using my third function, as I do not enjoy the person I become when I do consciously use it. Of course, I also have no idea of what I'm like when I'm unaware of me using it.

I would love to know how to properly engage it.

 

[Wonkavision]

The balance, it seems, of a healthy, functioning top two functions, is a darker, less reasonable lower two functions.

I agree completely.

It's a trade-off.

It would be nice if all of one's functions were equally effective, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

We seem to develop, within ourselves, a heirarchy of superior and inferior functions.

Inferior functions can be developed by exposing one's self to situations where the top two functions are insufficient.

But to think they can ever be developed to the level of the top two seems like a pipe-dream.

It would be wiser, in my opinion, to focus on developing the secondary function.

This will keep the dominant function in check, and protect one's self from being pulled in the direction of inferior functions.


I realize this is all theoretical, and that its pretty heady stuff, but I'm not just making it up.

There's a chapter about this in Personality Type:An Owner's Manual, by Lenore Thomson.

Here's a link as well:

Tertiary Temptation

 

[Wonkavision]

I actively try to avoid using my third function, as I do not enjoy the person I become when I do consciously use it.

Same here.

In fact, I don't understand why an ENFP would want to consciously use Te--except that it temporarily gives an ENFP a sense of control over the environment, or provides a defense against a perceived attack.

But ultimately ENFPs do not desire to control their environment or to be overly defensive.

They want to accept and adapt to the environment with spontaneous warmth and openness.

Of course, I also have no idea of what I'm like when I'm unaware of me using it.

When ENFPs use Te unconsciously, it looks cold, rigid, and inflexible.

Combined with Ne it looks paranoid, and combined with the natural emotional expressiveness of ENFPs, it looks like an irrational "freak-out."

I would love to know how to properly engage it.

I think the way to properly engage it is to keep it in check.

It seems like the best way to do that is to strengthen secondary Fi.

 

[Amargith]

I'd love to be able to use it to reign in my chaos a bit, hence my question
Fi doesn't exactly care whether my day is organized or not.

 

[Little Linguist]

Without organization, I would go berserk in a haystack.

If I'm not organized, I get really antsy and nervous. I MUST be organized.

 

[Little Linguist]

Yeah, but Wonka, I still do not understand why you would WANT to keep it in check. I mean, it's such a great tool!

 

[Wonkavision]

I'd love to be able to use it to reign in my chaos a bit, hence my question

Fi doesn't exactly care whether my day is organized or not.

Actually, if you're an ENFP, then Fi is very concerned with what's best for you, whereas inferior Te is not.

Ultimately, Te is not concerned with reigning in one's own chaos.

It is turned outward and focused on reigning in what is peceived as others' chaos.


You want to reign in your own chaos, right?

Well, that's precisely what Fi does for the ENFP.

It's turned inward, and by applying personal value judgements to the ENFPs perceptions, it is focused on reigning in her/his own chaos.

 

[Wonkavision]

Yeah, but Wonka, I still do not understand why you would WANT to keep it in check. I mean, it's such a great tool!

For an ENFP, inferior Te must be kept in check, because it is so tempting to use it in place of the ENFP's more effective Fi.

Under stress, the ENFP would rather focus on others when things are going wrong, because it temporarily relieves her/his anxiety.

But this is not a good long-term strategy.



The Lenore Thomson Exegesis Wiki puts it this way:

Tertiary Te (ExFP): "Unfair!! I have to stick to my guns, I will not be bullied or cheated. Any number of authorities agree with me. All my friends agree with me. Everyone can see that my response is directly mandated by the situation: anything else would be irresponsible. These facts absolutely settle the matter, and there is no point in looking at it any further."

The Secondary Function (Fi) would say: "Fair or not, reasonable or not, recognized by anyone or not, what would truly accomplish some good here?"

 

[Lady_X]

Jeez, I thought you guys would be pissed off. It seems to me the demand the relief function imposes, when spelled out, usually has some fairly unpleasant worst case scenarios for other people. This is perhaps something of the dark side of the user. And the user, to some degree, is right there in the middle of it finding ways to say it is good.

It seems like the relief function, by virtue of not being under too much conscious control, imposes requirements, yes, on the user, but also on other people who interact with the user, what they're supposed to accept and do to fit in with the workings of the higher functions of the first person. If the function were under more conscious control, the imposition could be relaxed, but as it is, it's just there keeping on keeping on, insisting on environments.

hmm...i'm confused...are you saying that's a difficult mindset to interact with...is it unfair in some way i'm not seeing?

 

[Lady_X]

Same here.

In fact, I don't understand why an ENFP would want to consciously use Te--except that it temporarily gives an ENFP a sense of control over the environment, or provides a defense against a perceived attack.

But ultimately ENFPs do not desire to control their environment or to be overly defensive.

They want to accept and adapt to the environment with spontaneous warmth and openness.





When ENFPs use Te unconsciously, it looks cold, rigid, and inflexible.

Combined with Ne it looks paranoid, and combined with the natural emotional expressiveness of ENFPs, it looks like an irrational "freak-out."





I think the way to properly engage it is to keep it in check.

It seems like the best way to do that is to strengthen secondary Fi.

shit...i'm so unaware of my use of te...but i've certainly been guilty of behaving that way....shit...you people!! trying to screw with my inflated self confidence are you? i can't have that!

kidding...it's good stuff to hear.

 

[Lady_X]

For an ENFP, inferior Te must be kept in check, because it is so tempting to use it in place of the ENFP's more effective Fi.

Under stress, the ENFP would rather focus on others when things are going wrong, because it temporarily relieves her/his anxiety.

But this is not a good long-term strategy.



The Lenore Thomson Exegesis Wiki puts it this way:

whoa...shit! that too! totally embarrassed for myself.