Eric B
ⒺⓉⒷ
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,621
- MBTI Type
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 548
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
OK, here is another way to view functions, that should really bring them to life, in part from the way someone explained it to me. Even better and more in depth than the "perspective" designation I had adopted!
The functions represent the different ways the emotions are brought into relationship with our higher mental operations.
Every person goes though life having to process both concrete and abstract information, and then make both impersonal (logical) and personal (value) judgments. Where our type theory begins; and the whole key to it, is in the way this processing affects us emotionally. The functions are differentiated when a greater value is given to those choices where emotion and reason are in synch. When we use a function that is destined to become "preferred", we feel an emotional investment in what we're doing, and we feel in control of our emotional life, so we keep on doing it. We tend to be more stimulated by the function. It then appears to "develop" or get "stronger", and behaviors associated with it will increase.
This is pivotal to understanding the concepts, as many become confused in their or others' types from looking at behaviors, thinking "such-and-such type can't do that", or "He does such and such too much to be this type".
We all can see, hear touch, taste etc. But only some will have more of an emotional investment in that process, where it becomes "preferred". What is seen right before them is more important as data. To others, the information gained from it will be less relevant.
We all can recognize likely possibilities from situations. But only some will gain the emotional investment from that process, and it will be those same types who saw the plain, concrete data as less relevent. To them, there must be more to what is seen before you.
Here now, we can really clear things up regarding emotions, since this often gets mixed up with one of the functions.
We all have emotions and like and choose things based on likes and dislikes. Yet only some will have an emotional investment in emotions for their own sake, and specifically prefer to make their decisions accordingly.
We all can see impersonal cause-and-effect relationships in objects and situations, and make decisions accordingly to them. Yet only some will have an emotional investment in this process. Emotion for its own sake will be seen as almost nonsensical.
When functions are undifferentiated, It's not really the functions themselves that are suppressed, and merely waiting for us to "develop" skills associated with them. They simply remain tied to the emotional responses to life, as mobilized by the dominant function.
In other words, for the type preferring concrete data, any immediate abstractions of this data implied will simply support the emotional investment the person has in that concrete data. For the person who prefers impersonal criteria for decisions, the value he places on them will support his Thinking, rather than being a differentiated "Feeling" process.
So types for whom Si is not a conscious function (such as NJ's), will be able to remember things like anyone else; yet they will tend to see the past as less relevant than the Si-preferring SJ's (who will likely demand everything they are involved with be familiar to them). So when they are remembering something, they are not necessarily "using Si". As a primary perspective carrying an emotional investment, it is normally outside the consciousness.
Likewise; with me, I'm usually so busy looking at something for the concepts I associate it with or extract from it; I do not "see" everything that is there.
While I can actually see as good as any SP type, still, the attention is clearly focused elsewhere. I always gained more of an emotional high from pondering meanings, so just looking at something for nothing more than it being there just leaves a very "boring" or "incomplete" feeling. The Se perspective ends up less relevant (until I find I have missed something important, or are called to remember certain details of what was there).
An SJ type we would expect to also not be good at seeing what is there, because they only operate off of stored data. But to the contrary, because they need to take in current data in order to have something to store, they too will likely be better at just seeing what is there for what it is.
Hence, we can describe one single "S" function, that deals in sensory data, regardless of whether it is oriented inward or outward. However, what will happen with them is that the purpose of taking in the new information will be to create such a storehouse to draw from, and taking in new experience just for its own sake will be seen as less relevent (if not overly risky). To the SP type, a storehouse will be less relevent. Just deal with the new experience as it comes. (This further illustrates the difference between the J and P attitude).
This focus on emotions should also make the concept of the archetypes easier to understand; like the function themselves; they and their differentiation are forms of emotional reactions.
The functions represent the different ways the emotions are brought into relationship with our higher mental operations.
Every person goes though life having to process both concrete and abstract information, and then make both impersonal (logical) and personal (value) judgments. Where our type theory begins; and the whole key to it, is in the way this processing affects us emotionally. The functions are differentiated when a greater value is given to those choices where emotion and reason are in synch. When we use a function that is destined to become "preferred", we feel an emotional investment in what we're doing, and we feel in control of our emotional life, so we keep on doing it. We tend to be more stimulated by the function. It then appears to "develop" or get "stronger", and behaviors associated with it will increase.
This is pivotal to understanding the concepts, as many become confused in their or others' types from looking at behaviors, thinking "such-and-such type can't do that", or "He does such and such too much to be this type".
We all can see, hear touch, taste etc. But only some will have more of an emotional investment in that process, where it becomes "preferred". What is seen right before them is more important as data. To others, the information gained from it will be less relevant.
We all can recognize likely possibilities from situations. But only some will gain the emotional investment from that process, and it will be those same types who saw the plain, concrete data as less relevent. To them, there must be more to what is seen before you.
Here now, we can really clear things up regarding emotions, since this often gets mixed up with one of the functions.
We all have emotions and like and choose things based on likes and dislikes. Yet only some will have an emotional investment in emotions for their own sake, and specifically prefer to make their decisions accordingly.
We all can see impersonal cause-and-effect relationships in objects and situations, and make decisions accordingly to them. Yet only some will have an emotional investment in this process. Emotion for its own sake will be seen as almost nonsensical.
When functions are undifferentiated, It's not really the functions themselves that are suppressed, and merely waiting for us to "develop" skills associated with them. They simply remain tied to the emotional responses to life, as mobilized by the dominant function.
In other words, for the type preferring concrete data, any immediate abstractions of this data implied will simply support the emotional investment the person has in that concrete data. For the person who prefers impersonal criteria for decisions, the value he places on them will support his Thinking, rather than being a differentiated "Feeling" process.
So types for whom Si is not a conscious function (such as NJ's), will be able to remember things like anyone else; yet they will tend to see the past as less relevant than the Si-preferring SJ's (who will likely demand everything they are involved with be familiar to them). So when they are remembering something, they are not necessarily "using Si". As a primary perspective carrying an emotional investment, it is normally outside the consciousness.
Likewise; with me, I'm usually so busy looking at something for the concepts I associate it with or extract from it; I do not "see" everything that is there.
While I can actually see as good as any SP type, still, the attention is clearly focused elsewhere. I always gained more of an emotional high from pondering meanings, so just looking at something for nothing more than it being there just leaves a very "boring" or "incomplete" feeling. The Se perspective ends up less relevant (until I find I have missed something important, or are called to remember certain details of what was there).
An SJ type we would expect to also not be good at seeing what is there, because they only operate off of stored data. But to the contrary, because they need to take in current data in order to have something to store, they too will likely be better at just seeing what is there for what it is.
Hence, we can describe one single "S" function, that deals in sensory data, regardless of whether it is oriented inward or outward. However, what will happen with them is that the purpose of taking in the new information will be to create such a storehouse to draw from, and taking in new experience just for its own sake will be seen as less relevent (if not overly risky). To the SP type, a storehouse will be less relevent. Just deal with the new experience as it comes. (This further illustrates the difference between the J and P attitude).
This focus on emotions should also make the concept of the archetypes easier to understand; like the function themselves; they and their differentiation are forms of emotional reactions.