[Si] more tertiary Si for NTPs

[Feline]

Hi, I've read the advice that INFPs and INTPs need MORE Si in order to become more grounded. I don't doubt it, but want to understand the reasoning. Why is it not that we need more Se? Isn't Se more grounded (and faster?) than Si? Wouldn't a bit more Se go a long way and prevent Ti+Si or Fi+Si looping?

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

Hi, I've read the advice that INFPs and INTPs need MORE Si in order to become more grounded. I don't doubt it, but want to understand the reasoning. Why is it not that we need more Se? Isn't Se more grounded (and faster?) than Si? Wouldn't a bit more Se go a long way and prevent Ti+Si or Fi+Si looping?

Se runs counter to the auxiliary function of the INxP, Ne. Engaging in Se related tasks essentially "turns off" Ne, which means instead of relating to others through strong Ne, you will be forced to relating to others through weak Se, as they are both Pe functions. In Beebe's Model, this is the conflict seen between the Parent Archetype (Auxiliary) and the Trickster Archetype (Shadow Tertiary), which deactivate each other. (For Socionics, this is the Creative Function and the Vulnerable Function)

The way to get out of "looping" is to utilize valued extroverted functions if you are an introvert, and to utilize valued introverted functions if you are an extrovert. While using Se would do the trick in allowing you to escape Ji-Si looping, it would be extremely not preferable to the INxP, as that function is both unvalued and excruciatingly weak, even loathed to a point. The more preferable route that won't lead to irascibility and annoyance* would be to engage Ne, as it is a valued and strong function.

*Representative of the Vulnerable function of Socionics for the xII, with being a function that is desperately avoided and acknowledged painfully (or shamefully) when others bring it to your attention.

 

[Mal12345]

Se runs counter to the auxiliary function of the INxP, Ne. Engaging in Se related tasks essentially "turns off" Ne, which means instead of relating to others through strong Ne, you will be forced to relating to others through weak Se, as they are both Pe functions. In Beebe's Model, this is the conflict seen between the Parent Archetype (Auxiliary) and the Trickster Archetype (Shadow Tertiary), which deactivate each other. (For Socionics, this is the Creative Function and the Vulnerable Function)

The way to get out of "looping" is to utilize valued extroverted functions if you are an introvert, and to utilize valued introverted functions if you are an extrovert. While using Se would do the trick in allowing you to escape Ji-Si looping, it would be extremely not preferable to the INxP, as that function is both unvalued and excruciatingly weak, even loathed to a point. The more preferable route that won't lead to irascibility and annoyance* would be to engage Ne, as it is a valued and strong function.

*Representative of the Vulnerable function of Socionics for the xII, with being a function that is desperately avoided and acknowledged painfully (or shamefully) when others bring it to your attention.

WHOAAAAAAA!!!

 

[Evo]

Se runs counter to the auxiliary function of the INxP, Ne. Engaging in Se related tasks essentially "turns off" Ne, which means instead of relating to others through strong Ne, you will be forced to relating to others through weak Se, as they are both Pe functions. In Beebe's Model, this is the conflict seen between the Parent Archetype (Auxiliary) and the Trickster Archetype (Shadow Tertiary), which deactivate each other. (For Socionics, this is the Creative Function and the Vulnerable Function)

The way to get out of "looping" is to utilize valued extroverted functions if you are an introvert, and to utilize valued introverted functions if you are an extrovert. While using Se would do the trick in allowing you to escape Ji-Si looping, it would be extremely not preferable to the INxP, as that function is both unvalued and excruciatingly weak, even loathed to a point. The more preferable route that won't lead to irascibility and annoyance* would be to engage Ne, as it is a valued and strong function.

*Representative of the Vulnerable function of Socionics for the xII, with being a function that is desperately avoided and acknowledged painfully (or shamefully) when others bring it to your attention.

[MENTION=22192]Feline[/MENTION]

The key word here is valued functions.

This post is perfection btws. (thank you God)

 

[Feline]

Se runs counter to the auxiliary function of the INxP, Ne. Engaging in Se related tasks essentially "turns off" Ne, which means instead of relating to others through strong Ne, you will be forced to relating to others through weak Se, as they are both Pe functions. In Beebe's Model, this is the conflict seen between the Parent Archetype (Auxiliary) and the Trickster Archetype (Shadow Tertiary), which deactivate each other. (For Socionics, this is the Creative Function and the Vulnerable Function)

The way to get out of "looping" is to utilize valued extroverted functions if you are an introvert, and to utilize valued introverted functions if you are an extrovert. While using Se would do the trick in allowing you to escape Ji-Si looping, it would be extremely not preferable to the INxP, as that function is both unvalued and excruciatingly weak, even loathed to a point. The more preferable route that won't lead to irascibility and annoyance* would be to engage Ne, as it is a valued and strong function.

*Representative of the Vulnerable function of Socionics for the xII, with being a function that is desperately avoided and acknowledged painfully (or shamefully) when others bring it to your attention.

Ok. I think I understand what you wrote: INPs prefer using Si over Se, so it will make them less neurotic or something like that to use Si. But when I looked up trickster archetype, that was way too complicated. Maybe some day I will make time to learn what that means.

 

[Opal]

Ok. I think I understand what you wrote: INPs prefer using Si over Se, so it will make them less neurotic or something like that to use Si. But when I looked up trickster archetype, that was way too complicated. Maybe some day I will make time to learn what that means.

The basic premise of the archetypes is that there are 8 function slots for everyone, and each function slot interacts with the others in a specific, fixed way. I'm still idly coming to understand the framework in its ambiguous, empty state (rather than specifically studying INTPs, for example). Just bookmark Beebe's model, read some, headbutt the wall, read more, lose interest in typology, relapse, read more, etc.

 

[INTP]

Extraverted perception of NP is Ne, not Se. Sensation takes introverted attitude when intuition takes the extraverted attitude.

What NPs need is the realization of the subjectivity of their sensation, not some weird rationalization of 7th Se function..

 

[INTP]

The basic premise of the archetypes is that there are 8 function slots for everyone, and each function slot interacts with the others in a specific, fixed way. I'm still idly coming to understand the framework in its ambiguous, empty state (rather than specifically studying INTPs, for example). Just bookmark Beebe's model, read some, headbutt the wall, read more, lose interest in typology, relapse, read more, etc.

Thats not the basic premise of archetypes. That definition of archetypes has next to nothing to do with what archetypes are about. All complexes(/contents of the personal unconscious) are built upon archetypes(/contents of the collective unconscious), but that doesent mean that the archetypes are somehow directly connected to functions in some specific order. I mean if we take the beebes idea of 3th child function, its not about this at all..; Child (archetype) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or this Puer aeternus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also there is one(or actually tens of them, but ill only list one) logical inconsistency with beebes definition to jungs definition as well. Child archetype in jungs view is a potential of growth(except with ethernal child, its more about peter pan complex) and its shadow is the wise old man(beebe says its the trickster), the "grown up" version of the child archetype. Now if we imagine for a second that tert function is somehow connected to child archetype, what happens when the child grows up and wise old man appears instead of the child? Does tert function stop existing or does it change its archetype? Well neither seems plausible, since the archetype is more profound than just some function thing, the whole person represents the archetype of the wise old man..

"Individual archetypal themes are clear in certain abnormal states and particular phases of development as, for example, in some phantasies of psychotics and young children.." - Journal of analytical psychology volume 1

 

[Opal]

Thats not the basic premise of archetypes. That definition of archetypes has next to nothing to do with what archetypes are about. All complexes(/contents of the personal unconscious) are built upon archetypes(/contents of the collective unconscious), but that doesent mean that the archetypes are somehow directly connected to functions in some specific order. I mean if we take the beebes idea of 3th child function, its not about this at all..; Child (archetype) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia or this Puer aeternus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also there is one(or actually tens of them, but ill only list one) logical inconsistency with beebes definition to jungs definition as well. Child archetype in jungs view is a potential of growth(except with ethernal child, its more about peter pan complex) and its shadow is the wise old man(beebe says its the trickster), the "grown up" version of the child archetype. Now if we imagine for a second that tert function is somehow connected to child archetype, what happens when the child grows up and wise old man appears instead of the child? Does tert function stop existing or does it change its archetype? Well neither seems plausible, since the archetype is more profound than just some function thing, the whole person represents the archetype of the wise old man..

"Individual archetypal themes are clear in certain abnormal states and particular phases of development as, for example, in some phantasies of psychotics and young children.." - Journal of analytical psychology volume 1

I should have referred to Beebe's model, not the archetypes, you're right.

I would guess the tert function would be fulfilled in that case, developed and coexisting with its opposite orientation, but not replaced. Hard to say though, you've obviously studied Beebe's model more thoroughly than I have.