OLD AND OUTDATED, WRONG MISLEADING INFORMATION
A little history (Skip if you don’t care): All ideas that
were theorized about what you may here nowadays as MBTI and/or Socionics were
first developed by one of the biggest psychologists of all time, Carl Jung, on the release of his book “Psychological Types” in 1921 (1923 in
English). Fast forward to 1943, while World War II was making most males go on
war leaving their jobs that had to be taken by females which were most housewives.
Katherine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Myers Briggs set up a
questionnaire to help women in choosing their jobs. Another concept very
similar to the theory behind the MBTI test was created in 1970 by Antoni
Kępiński (Polish) called Socionics. Some
people believe it is the same theory described in a different way while some
believe they are two different systems. Either way, I am going to present to
you what I believe in the most in-depth I could go about the theory cognitive
functions, mostly based on MBTI with other influences such as Socionics as
inspiration and the early works of Carl Jung. You may ask “Is this MBTI theory
or Socionics theory or completely something else???”. Well I am part of the
people who thinks they are the same thing but it is not objective truth and I
am not going to impose my views on the other group of people. To clear
misconceptions I believe the best thing we could do is call it Jungian Theory
as it is firstly theorized by Jung.
Jungian theory is based on the idea that there are 8 main cognitive
functions. A cognitive function is basically a way that a human perceives the
world, processes (4 of them), or absorbs information (the other 4), basically 8
ways of thinking.
There are 16 personality types;
each consisted of 4 letters (called dichotomies). Your personality type is
basically the ORDER of these 8 functions according to preference and role (not
from strongest to weakest!!!). Each person, regardless of their personality
type is able to use each one of the 8 functions and probably did use every one
of them at least once in their life-time. Your personality type (ex. INTP,
ESFJ, ISFP, ENTJ, etc.) orders the 8 functions, not according to their strength,
but according to your preference of using them!
The way your personality type
arranges your functions is according to the ROLE they play in your life, I
could say the most important to the least important, but that's not 100%
accurate either because it's like saying your heart and brain are more
important than your stomach and your liver, you would die without any of them,
you need all of them! Same with the functions, you need all 8 of them to live,
they play an important role in your life, even your 7th and 8th!
So the functions are divided into
two categories: Judging functions, the ones that process, understand, modify
and distort information and perceiving functions, the ones that absorb
information. They are also divided into two more categories, introverted
functions, the ones that make most of their work on your inside, and
extroverted functions, the ones who work on the outside world. Without judging
functions you would only take all that information in without being able to do
anything with it so you basically could not think but without perceiving
functions you would not have any information to work with so basically you
would be retarded too.
A word about
introverted vs. extraverted: (Also skip if you don’t have time and
you don’t want to waste time on advanced stuff and would prefer to go straight
to the point): As Jung said “The
general-attitude types, as I have pointed out more than once, are
differentiated by their particular attitude to the object. The introvert's
attitude to the object is an abstracting one; at bottom, he is always facing
the problem of how libido can be withdrawn from the object, as though an
attempted ascendancy on. the part of the object had to be continually
frustrated. The extravert, on the contrary, maintains a positive relation to
the object. To such an extent does he affirm its importance that his subjective
attitude is continually being orientated by, and related to the object. An
fond, the object can never have sufficient value; for him, therefore, its
importance must always be paramount.” – Psychological Types by Carl Jung, 1921.
What that means is that the main
difference between an introverted and an extroverted function is the relation
between the subject (me, myself, the user, internal world, subjective opinion) and
the object (everyone else, objects and human beings, external forces, external
world, objective opinion). The introvert is sees the external world as a
complete different entity from him/herself (the user), “it’s me and there’s the
world” while the extravert is directly living in the world, and quoting Carl
Jung: “who are on good terms with all the world, or, even when disagreeing with
it, still hold a relation to it by which they and it are mutually affected”.
An important sentence I have to say is about the spending and release of the energy between the subject and the object in the two different concepts (introversion and extroversion): THE INTROVERT FOCUSES ON HOW THE OBJECT AFFECTS THE SUBJECT WHILE THE EXTROVERT FOCUSES ON HOW THE SUBJECT AFFECTS THE OBJECT. That would also mean that introversion vs. extroversion would also mean that introversion is much more subjective than extroversion. If you would put ten same extroverted types in a room (for example ENTJ) they would probably come to an agreement quickly while if you put in a room 10 INTJs they would most likely keep a subjective opinion. Now that is a very particular case, there are a lot of factors that come into play, but, keep in mind that there is no pure introvert or pure extrovert type, every type has 4 introverted functions and 4 extroverted functions, the introvert having more confidence and creativity in his introverted functions and the extrovert in his extroverted ones, which basically means my last sentence was completely wrong and false unless the ENTJ/INTJ would only use one function which is almost impossible since any reasoning would include the use of at least two functions, one judging (to process the information) and one perceiving (to absorb the information). Now if ten introverted FUNCTIONS were to debate a topic they would most likely all have different opinions when if there were ten extroverted FUNCTIONS debating they would come to agreement fast BUT the functions aren’t human beings so that is impossible ;)
An important sentence I have to say is about the spending and release of the energy between the subject and the object in the two different concepts (introversion and extroversion): THE INTROVERT FOCUSES ON HOW THE OBJECT AFFECTS THE SUBJECT WHILE THE EXTROVERT FOCUSES ON HOW THE SUBJECT AFFECTS THE OBJECT. That would also mean that introversion vs. extroversion would also mean that introversion is much more subjective than extroversion. If you would put ten same extroverted types in a room (for example ENTJ) they would probably come to an agreement quickly while if you put in a room 10 INTJs they would most likely keep a subjective opinion. Now that is a very particular case, there are a lot of factors that come into play, but, keep in mind that there is no pure introvert or pure extrovert type, every type has 4 introverted functions and 4 extroverted functions, the introvert having more confidence and creativity in his introverted functions and the extrovert in his extroverted ones, which basically means my last sentence was completely wrong and false unless the ENTJ/INTJ would only use one function which is almost impossible since any reasoning would include the use of at least two functions, one judging (to process the information) and one perceiving (to absorb the information). Now if ten introverted FUNCTIONS were to debate a topic they would most likely all have different opinions when if there were ten extroverted FUNCTIONS debating they would come to agreement fast BUT the functions aren’t human beings so that is impossible ;)
Also one thing I hear a lot by
most people is that “extroverts recharge with socializing and spend their
energy with alone time while the introvert recharges with alone time and spends
their energy with socializing.”. While that might be true in some cases and to
some extent, I think a better phrase would be that “extroverts recharge from
their outside and spend their energy one the inside while the introvert
recharges on their inside and spends their energy on the outside.”. “Outside”
doesn’t always mean “people and socializing”, there can be extroverts that are
extremely drained by people and people-oriented extroverts. So in conclusion
the “extroverts are people who go at parties and stay with people” and
“introverts are people who stay alone and play video games” is relatively true
in majority, that means that if you are an extrovert it is more likely for you
to go to parties more and if you are an introvert it is more likely to stay in
the house more but that’s not a must. Also do not confuse introvert with shy.
It is true that most shy people are introverts but extroverted shy people exist
and introverted non-shy people exist. Do NOT confuse those terms.
Also, introverts more or less feel as if they always need to
hold to the connection of the outside world all the time, otherwise that
connection would be lost. They always need to drag themselves to stay in touch
with the external world, one second you forget about it and the connection is
lost. Extroverts are the other way around, they always need to drag themselves
to stay in touch with their inner world, you blink and connection is lost.
Often where this connection lost thing is happening it's called "tertiary loops".
Introversion is an inwards-turning
of energy. It’s an orientation that expresses the supremacy of subjective part
of life; one’s inner thoughts, feelings, personal experiences. This does not
mean that introverts are always introspective – instead, their relation to the
outside world is colored by their subjective view in such a way that their
perceptions and judgments hinge more on their private inner reality than on the
shared reality of the objective world. Because their energy moves away from the
object (and towards the subject), they tend to be relatively reserved,
inscrutable, and shy, but that's not always the case. What I would say is
almost always the case is that they are "distant", they distance
themselves from the outer world all the time, like they're scared of it or they
want to defend themselves from it. This distancing can be mistaken for shyness
or social anxiety but it's not a must.
Extroversion is an
outwards-turning of energy. Here the objective part of life is the most
important. Extroverts think and act in a way that corresponds more directly to
external conditions. They aren’t necessarily perfectly adjusted – extroversion
is no guarantee of good social skills, and furthermore, neglecting their inner
life often results in grief for the extrovert. However, they are constantly
impelled to relate to the outer world in some way, and in turn to be affected
by it, whether that means they’re on good terms with everybody, or that they
pick fights with everybody. In general they are relatively open, sociable, jovial,
or at least friendly and approachable, but, again, that's not always the case.
In comparison to the defensive distanced introvert, the extrovert is going
against the external world instead of distancing themselves from it, like
attackers instead of defenders.
Now the actual cognitive
functions.
Jungian theory classifies
absorbing information (perceiving axis) into either SENSING or INTUITION.
iNtuition works out what COULD be from patterns while Sensing works out what IS
using out five senses. Because functions are also classified into either
introverted and extroverted that leaves us with 4 perceiving functions:
Extroverted iNtuition (for short Ne), Introverted iNtuition (for short Ni),
Extroverted Sensing (for short Se) and Introverted Sensing (for short Si). What
they actually do is described a few paragraphs below.
Same theory classifies processing
information (judging axis) into either THINKING or FEELING. Thinking functions
process information by logical systems (aka principles), “true/false, cause and
effect, etc.” while feeling functions process information by emotional systems
(aka values/morals) “good/evil, right/wrong”. Because functions are also
classified into either introverted and extroverted that leaves us with 4 judging
functions: Extroverted Thinking (for short Te), Introverted Thinking (for short
Ti), Extroverted Feeling (fort short Fe), Introverted Feeling (for short Fi).
Remember when I said the order of
your functions is by preference? The main processes are your 1st and
2nd functions, also called the DOMINANT and the AUXILIARY. Your
dominant and auxiliary functions make about 75% of your personality. If one is
a judging function the other one would be a perceiving function because, as I
said, at the beginning “Without judging
functions you would only take all that information in without being able to do
anything with it so you basically could not think but without perceiving
functions you would not have any information to work with so basically you
would be retarded too.”. Also, if one of the functions is introverted the
other one would be extroverted so you could have easy access to both worlds.
Before I actually go into
cognitive functions deeply I would like to describe briefly the dichotomies
(the four letters that the test gives you).
E vs. I; Extroversion vs.
Introversion: E types have their dominant function extroverted and their
auxiliary function introverted. Introverts have their dominant function
introverted and their auxiliary function extroverted. I think I made myself
clear a few paragraphs ago about what introversion and extroversion mean.
N vs. S: iNtuition vs. Sensing: N types have their first PERCIEVING function (either 1st
or 2nd) iNtuitive while their next perceiving function (either 3rd or 4th)
Sensing. Sensors are the other way around.
This is the axis of absorbing information. The difference between the two dichotomies is that N types see
what COULD be before what IS and S types see what IS before what COULD be.
iNtuitive types draw their conclusion on their “what if” scenarios and
visions/predictions about the future from noticing patterns of how things
evolved through time and they tend to be more preoccupied with theories and
ambiguous things like psychology, science or art. Sensing types see what IS
exactly in front of them, trusting their five senses more than their iNtuition
so they are preoccupied more with practical activities involving the physical
world.
T vs. F: Thinking vs. Feeling: Thinkers have their first JUDGING function (either 1st
or 2nd) thinking and the next judging function (either 3rd
or 4th) feeling. Feelers are the other way around. This is the axis
of processing information. Thinking types prefer using logic before consulting
the emotions while Feeling types prefer consulting the emotions before thinking
about the logic of a situation. Also how we make decisions.
J vs. P: Judging vs. Perceiving: This is a rather tricky, but very
important and often misunderstood one. J types have in their first EXTROVERTED function (can be 1st
or 2nd) judging while
perceivers have their first EXTROVERTED
function (can be 1st or 2nd) perceiving. Due to J types working their way in the external world
through a judging function they are much more organized in the external world
and prefer strict schedules and deadlines. They are introverted in the way of
absorbing information as a result, relying on experience and similar stuff. Due
to P types working their way on the external world through a perceiving
function, they dislike strict schedules and organization, preferring to keep
their options open and being more flexible. As a result, their introverted
function is a judging one and that means that their internal world would be
much more systematic and organized.
First off, here is a very short
descriptions of the functions based on this article: http://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com/articles/1-Information-Domains
I changed a few of the words up so
there is no confusion between homonyms/poliysemantic words or just concepts
that can be interpreted in many ways. Also added some things to be more
accurate.
Te Agenda(what the function does): is
factual information, which means anything that you can express directly in
language. So it can apply to what's happening here and now just as well as any
other time or place, “facts” and concrete logic, (logic = valid/invalid, cause
and effect, etc.). All Te systems are universal because of all being in the
same big context (the universe), thus it is the most objective and exact
information available.
What the user does with it: Goal oriented behavior, “what can I do
with this new information”, orderliness and structure in environment,
organizing information in the outside world, desire to be a leader or to be in
control.
Fe Agenda: is
information conveyed about the state of the entities (generally humans)
communicating at the time and place of communication, which is inherently local
and cannot be conveyed reliably. A little more specific and less generalized
than Te, Fe also classifies information a little differently, focusing on the
emotional states of the humans interacting to each other (good=positive energy,
evil=bad energy) making the sorting much more humanistic, regarding in values. (values = good/evil,
right/wrong, etc.). Generally the values are decided upon a common agreement in
the specific group, making it less universal and more subjective than Te.
What the user does with it: Trying to achieve group harmony, going
with the crowd(or leading the crowd), empathetic and humanistic approaches to
people, extreme need for socializing, “I’ll understand myself through
understanding others”.
Fi Agenda: is
information about something or someone's relationship ("closeness")
to a particular person. A subjective version of Fe, Fi is focusing on the
subject at hand making it all about the user’s emotional state instead of the
group’s overall emotional state. It is still based on ethics instead of logic.
(good/evil)
What the user does with it: Measuring worth/importance “what does it
mean to me?” “do I value this/find this important? What is important to me?”,
empathetic and humanistic approaches to people, (most of the time) and “I’ll
understand others through understanding myself”.
Ti Agenda: is
information about how things relate to each other in a distributed logical system
that includes many entities. (Still using logic aka valid/invalid, true/false,
etc.) Abstracting of information on a subjective understanding of reality,
having set “rules” of how things work.
What the user does with it: “How does this relate to other pieces of
my system?”, logical and cold-hearted approach to people “rude”, nitpicking
details, going for 100% accuracy.
Se Agenda= what
is, concrete exact and objective perception of reality through the 5 senses
with no further post-processing.
What the user does with it: “Live every day like it’s your last day”
approach to life, living in the moment, indulging in sensorial pleasures (food,
sex, etc.), (extreme) sports, etc.
Ne Agenda= what
could be, i.e. the total space of possibilities, in which "what is"
is just one point among many. While Se is perceiving immediate concrete reality
through the 5 senses, Ne could be called perceiving all the alternate/parallel
realities, all the “what if” scenarios, from the most fantastic unrealistic
scenarios to the most realistic ones with an actual chance of happening.
Seeking possibilities in the future.
What the user does with it: Daydreaming of fantastic unrealistic
scenarios, asks a lot of “what if” questions, often appears as “random” to
others, undecided of what to do in the future because of seeking a lot of
possibilities.
Si Agenda= how
things directly affect each other, usually by direct contact and interaction,
which is inherently local.
What the user does with it: Looking at the past to solve problems,
“did I ever solve this problem ever again in my past?”, a desire to follow
tradition and to ruminate over past, learning through memorizing details,
“visual memory”, a ton of nostalgia, a first-person approach to the user’s past
like reliving moments “ahh back in my day”.
Ni Agenda= how
things are significant in the grand scheme of things, or how things affect each
other in various hidden ways, “interconnections”.
What the user does with it: “How does this relate to everything I’ve
ever experienced, felt, thought and imagined?”, learning by abstract
information (abstractions which are subjective to the user), seeking the
meaning behind things and “looking behind the words”, being perfectionistic and
focused on only one-two-three things all their life, having visions about the
future, being drawn to symbolism.
Now the actual in-depth descriptions of the 8 functions:
Judging functions:
The four judging
functions (to process and distort information) are as follows:
Te (extroverted
thinking), Fe (extroverted feeling), Ti (introverted thinking), Fi (introverted
feeling).
Fe and Fi are all about how certain “entities” interact with each
other. While Ti and Te are more preoccupied with what the actual entities are
(so all they can do is classify information as either valid/invalid or
true/false etc.) Fi and Fe are focusing on the energy exhibited by one entity to another, the relationships
between people so they tend to have a more humanistic
side to them. Feelers realized through time that entity can influence
another one either positively (positive energy) or negatively (negative
energy), thus creating a moral/ethical system. What that means is while Ti and
Te classify information into true or false, Fi and Fe classify information into
either GOOD OR BAD (good/evil). If
positive energy is transferred, then it is good. If the energy is negative,
then it is bad.
Fi and Fe are preoccupied with
human emotions while Ti and Te are preoccupied with logic. As a result from all
of this, Ti/Te are much more strict, either "true or false", no in
between, some sort of "cause and effect" while Fi/Fe are more about
how other people feel which is much more relative and contextual so those kind
of systems tend to not be that strict, BUT they classify things into either
"good/evil".
Users of Fi and Fe realized
through time that doing certain actions/activities/gestures can make other
people FEEL better, making them feel like a better person so these 2 function
generated some MORAL/ETHICAL VALUES
(“It’s not right to do so/It’s not appropriate to say that/It’s good to say a
certain word, etc.), for example, people realized that saying simple things as
“thank you” or “please” can raise some people’s moods which is a good thing.
Fe is common
democratic agreement in society of morals so all Fe morals are pretty much
manners or things like "You have to always give your seat to an old
person" or "Don't pick your nose in public!". For not obeying Fe
values you can't get arrested, you'll just get a bunch of dirty looks. Now Fi,
Fi is centered on the user’s emotions so they impose their own morals/values.
They are much more subjective and find particular cases, while Fe would say
"It is never right to do so!", Fi would come and say "But in
this particular situation, it is!".
The two functions are very
empathetic, loving and caring, but in a little more different way which I will
explain later.
They make decisions based on emotions (Fi: "I want this/I like
this". Fe: "My loved ones
want this/like this".) and classify things into either: GOOD/EVIL;
RIGHT/WRONG, etc. Fe takes the
values/morals/ethics more for what they are when they hear them without much
post-processing done by them, basically what the community society thinks it’s
good then they’ll do that. Their main goal is conformity, if a
society/community that they are in thinks that a certain gesture is
inappropriate then they’ll probably stop doing it just because 99% of people
think so (that doesn’t mean that they are dumb and they can’t think for
themselves, they might come to the idea that the rule/ethic/moral/value is
idiotic and nonsense, but after all they might still follow it so they won’t be
the “odd one out” and to conform and basically to have OVERALL HARMONY AND
PEACE FOR EVERYONE. They might just follow the ethic that they find idiotic to
not make anyone feel bad). Fi on the other hand, Fi takes a little from every ethic/value system and post-process it
internally. If Fi users find a certain moral/value/ethic in society idiotic
and nonsensical they will not do it. They
impose their own values because of its subjective nature.
Oh and let me do a little
copy-pasting from this amazing reddit comment from a fellow ISFJ: (Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/6c0wu2/how_do_i_tell_the_difference_between_fe_and_fi/dhrfir6/?utm_content=permalink&utm_medium=front&utm_source=reddit&utm_name=mbti)
“Fe is a harmonizing function, and ultimately it will resolve conflicts by
compromising on values until it reaches common ground. Fi, on the other hand,
will use its internal emotional processing to understand what the other is
feeling, and try to argue the other to their own position.
Because Fe is extroverted, it deals with objective realities, and the only
objective reality there is as far as feeling is concerned is the feeling of the
group. Not only do Fe-users move towards service of the group, but they can be
quite pushy about others doing the same.
Fi is the opposite, it deals with subjective realities, and because
Fi-users are able to process their emotions internally without external
reference they can imagine what others might be feeling, and therefore a mature
Fi user is more likely to be happy with disharmony because they recognize people
see things different ways, and just as he has a right to see things how he
wants, so do others.
It might not be immediately obvious, but actually, the concept of human
rights comes out of an Fi mindset. It's a little counter-intuitive but
individual rights requires the mindset of people think differently, people feel
differently, and even those people harmful to society should be protected.
Whereas an Fe user can be pretty ruthless if they determine that there are
individuals or traits that are a risk to the general population. They would be
totally happy to go on a witch hunt. Fe requires connection, Fe-users need to
discuss their feelings to process them, and this can lead to them serving their
communities.”
FE =I WILL UNDERSTAND MYSELF THROUGH UNDERSTANDING OTHERS
FI = I WILL UNDERSTAND OTHERS THROUGH UNDERSTANDING MYSELF
(IS Fi SELFISH?): Now
since Fe is focusing on how their actions affect other people’s feelings and Fi
focuses on how the actions of other people affect their feelings, here comes
the ultimate question: Is Fi selfish???
Well that’s a question with no definitive answer; it can be pretty
controversial at times. In a sense, Fi makes sure of their own feelings and THEN
others while Fe is the opposite. Fi wants authenticity and being true to
yourself and others AND THEN to have harmony and be liked by others; while Fe
wants to be liked by others and for everyone to feel good and harmony AND THEN
authenticity and all that stuff. Both of them are good in their own way, it’s
just the way your perceive them. They do the same thing in a reversed way,
after all the difference is just that they have different priorities. In a way
you can say that Fi is selfish in some way, but at the same time people with
high Fi can be the most loving and caring people you’ll ever meet in your life.
It is true that immature Fi can be selfish but at the same time immature Fe can
be emotionally manipulative and even bully-ish. Everything has its pros and
cons.
Also, Fi users want to give to the
world and be as generous as they can but they might feel that they can’t really
give their best unless they satisfy their own feelings first so you can say
that on the long term Fi is not selfish at all. Also, Fe users help others so
they help themselves, “making others feel better makes me feel better” and
often might even expect stuff in return… You can say that on the long term Fe
is the selfish one… It’s all a matter of perspective; they are both horrible
and amazing in their own way.
Also, quoting a little from this wonderful article: http://www.personalityhacker.com/infp-vs-infj/
Also, quoting a little from this wonderful article: http://www.personalityhacker.com/infp-vs-infj/
“There is some confusion around
whether or not Fi is ‘selfish’ or ‘self-centered’ in comparison to Fe. While
immature Fi can be quite self-indulgent, mature Fi is vital for a healthy
society. Fi is where we experience integrity, the part of us that says it’s
unconscionable to offend our own values. The only way to 1) know ones values
and 2) stay true to them is to spend time deep-diving into one’s own conscience
and subjective emotional experience.
On the other hand, Fe when
immature looks more like emotional manipulation and social bullying, while
mature Fe makes sure all of our needs are understood and taken care of.”
Fi vs, Fe on
expressing emotions through language:
While Fi would say “I hate this”
(I=subject; this=object) Fe would say “This is horrible” (this=object and no
mentioning of the subject).
While Fi would say “I hate how you
make me feel” (I/me=subject you=object); Fe would say “You’re a horrible
person” (you=object and no mentioning of the subject).
While Fi would say “I hate you!”
(I=subject; you=object) Fe would say “Fuck you!” (no mentioning of the subject)
etc. you get the idea
(Fi vs. Fe on
empathy): Also, their empathy/sympathy is a little different,
actually reversed. Fi is putting themselves in the other person’s shoes and is
actually getting severely affected emotionally by the other person’s experiences
but they still think about their own emotions they felt, even if the situation
was from another person. Fe is making a clear line between their emotions and
the emotions of the person in trouble. Fi is feeling a much more subjective
version of what other people feel, it’s rarely accurate but it’s very intense.
Fe is able to pick up their actual feeling more accurately. They both really
feel the other person’s feelings, only that Fi is focusing about how their
emotions were affected and it’s not really what the troubled person is feeling
and Fe is trying to detach and make a clear distinction between their feelings
and the user’s feelings. Fe is actually absorbing their emotions and most of
the time they’re accurate, Fi is pretty accurate only when very strong. The
better the Fi the more accurate it is. The strength of your Fe is not
proportional with it’s accuracy, instead, it is with its impact on the user.
Weaker Fe isn’t less accurate than strong Fe, it’s just more inactive. If
you’re at a funeral and you didn’t know the person but you’re crying just
because everyone else does it you’re most probably a Fe user.
We would say Fi “mirrors”
people’s emotions; Fi users are masters at understanding the emotions themselves. The nuance of their ability to mirror another person’s
emotional experience can feel like absorbing since it’s so spot on. But,
remember – this isn’t another person’s emotion in the Fi user's heart. This is
years and years of the Fi mapping emotions within themselves and finding the
closest proximity to what the other person is experiencing.
Fe is more like “your pain in my
heart”;
Also, their relationship with TIME is a little different.
To absorb another’s emotion, both
the Fe user and the other person (who is emoting) have to be together in real
time. This isn’t post-processing emotional experience, it’s an emotion hitting
the user due to energetic proximity. Fe is ABOSRBING the other person's
emotions.
For a Fi user it’s about finding
the emotion the other person is – was – or will be experiencing within
themselves. The emotion can be bound through time via works of art, literature,
journals and any/every other way we as people express our emotions. That's why
Fi users are masters at theatre, Fi is more like "What exactly would I be
feeling if I were you?".
There is a discrepancy between the
objective nature of the extraverted orientation of Fe and the fact that
feeling, after all should be an entirely subjective process.
“Feeling is primarily a process that takes place between the ego and a
given content, a process, moreover, that imparts to the content a definite
value in the sense of acceptance or rejection ('like' or 'dislike'); but it can
also appear, as it were, isolated in the form of 'mood', quite apart from the
momentary contents of consciousness or momentary sensations.
(…)
But even the mood, whether it be regarded as a general or only a partial
feeling, signifies a valuation; not, however, a valuation of one definite,
individual, conscious content, but of the whole conscious situation at the
moment, and, once again, with special reference to the question of acceptance
or rejection.
Feeling,
therefore, is an entirely subjective process, which may be in every respect
independent of external stimuli, although chiming in with every sensation
(…)
Even an 'indifferent' sensation possesses a 'feeling tone', namely, that of
indifference, which again expresses a certain valuation. Hence feeling is also
a kind of judging (…)”
-Chapter XI par. 725 of Psychological Types by Carl G. Jung
Mister Carl G. Jung the
“grandmaster” of typing said it himself that the context-based nature of
feeling makes it extremely hard to be universal (there can be a general truth
but there can’t be a general mood) therefore he decided to call it
“subjective”. This all makes sense in Introverted Feeling (Fi) but we also know
that Extroversion means objective. I will try to clarify the “objective
subjectiveness” of Fe.
“Feeling, whether introverted or extraverted, can always be called
“subjective”, because the criteria is the person’s own emotional response and
judgment. When introverted, it is this response (which is the actual activity
of the Feeling function) that is the main interest of the user. The focus is on
the experience of feeling (the internal mental process). When extroverted, the
focus is on what the user is having a feeling about (the external world); but
the Feeling-reaction is still a subjective process. The difference can roughly be
summarized as “How does it feel?” versus “How do I feel about it?” Another way
of thinking about it, is that Introverted Feeling examines feelings in their
own right; while for Extroverted
Feeling, they are primarily a means of relating oneself to, or engaging with,
the outside world.”
This all means that Fe is a
process in which an individual expresses himself through what he isn’t
initially. We know that Fe absorbs others’ people emotions (empathy). When
healthy and balanced, others’ emotions are a way of self-expression of the
self, again Fe monologue is “I will understand myself through understanding
others”. When a Fe dominant “blends with the crowd” and says that they like the
same TV show that you like just because you like it too and they don’t want to
make you feel bad, that doesn’t mean that they lied just to make yourself feel
better, they actually like it because
you like it. Even though the user’s mood (using Fe) is entirely dependent
on loved ones, that doesn’t change the fact that it’s the user’s mood! When
unhealthy and unbalanced, the “understanding myself” in “understanding myself
through understanding others” kind of disappears in the Fe user and could genuinely
be called “fake”. It loses its creative potential and charm. It becomes empty
and cold, it agrees with everything and everyone in contradictory ways, to the
point where it looks at though something’s up and the Fe user is playing a
manipulative game.
Personalities with Fe as their
first JUDGING function are xxFJ (ESFJ, ISFJ, ENFJ, INFJ) while Fi users are
xxFP (ESFP, ISFP, ENFP, INFP). Keep in mind that all 16 types can use all 8
functions!
Thinking functions however don't put a big priority about
being polite and not offending people, they want to know what exists, what is
efficient, what the truth is, etc. (That doesn’t mean that all Ti/Te users are
rude, just that the specific function doesn’t care about this! Everyone has
thinking and feeling functions too to be used for different things. Ti/Te/Fi/Fe
are cognitive functions, not people! People will have a feeling function in
their stack to balance the thinking, everyone needs one of both…)
Thinking is all about logic. logic /ˈlɒdʒɪk/ (noun) 1. reasoning
conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity.
“Thinking is that psychological function which, in accordance with its own
laws, brings given presentations into conceptual connection.”
-Chapter XI of Psychological Types by Carl G. Jung.
Thus, thinking is the process that
works the classification of entities. (into categories, etc.)
Thinking (regardless of its
orientation) is all about
1.
Defining entities
2.
Putting them to use.
An entity in this context is
defined as a something. An event, an object, a living being, a concept, a
theory, a thought, an emotion, a state of being, a “something”.
When thinking is oriented
outwardly (Te) it defines entities objectively and puts them to use in the
external world. “What it is and how can it be used?”
When thinking is oriented
internally (Ti) it defines entities subjectively and puts them to use in the
internal world. “What I think it is and how does it relate to my subjective
system of how things work?”
As the difference between Fe and
Fi are common agreements vs. imposed morals, that's Te and Ti too. Te has an
external logic system which is pretty much a common agreement in the system so
that everyone gets their job done while Ti has their own ways of doing things. DO NOT! confuse
Te with conformity of DOING things, don’t think that “Because
Fe behaves like everyone else Te does things like everyone else.” Instead, Te
looks for what works in the real world and lets the world around them do its
job. “Doesn’t matter how I got there, at least it works!”. Because of that, most Te users have the same system which
could be called a common agreement on majority because they all live in the same world/planet/universe. BUT, they won’t just do things
because everyone else does, that is Fe.
Te users take most logic systems
for what they are without much post-processing done to keep things simple and
not over-think while Ti would take a
little from everything they learn and adapt
it to their own internal logic system of how things work and how they should be done. As Fi takes a
little from every value and they post-process
it to make sure what values were good and what were bad, Ti will do that too,
but with logic systems because of the subjective (introverted) nature. (logic
system = exact and precise system, either true or false, 'cause and effect
,etc.)
Ti is like A-B-C-D-E, they see HOW
things work and come to conclusions about why they do that and create and
internal system while Te is like A-E, they are interested in the end
goal, the output result and tend to deny any unimportant information.
Ti is described as an internal
library where everything and every piece of information has its place. Te
actually organizes his library in the external world.
The way Ti works is by a principle
called “logical deduction”. It is
focused on the consistency of facts, “If X is true then Y must be true
as well!” or “Those two facts can’t exist at the same time! That means
one of them must be false!”. Te will never make such assumptions, Te must have
the facts laid out in front of him before making a choice.
“Ti dominants seek to understand and fit their observations to their models. Ti, no matter how objective it tries to be, is actually quite subjective (…)The Extraverted nature of Te exalts a distaste for letting the subjective factor poison the judgment process. It isn't much concerned with the validity, (...) but more with how the perceived facts can be used to achieve what one wants (Te-Fi). [yeah you’ll find later that Te is often paired with Fi and Ti is paired with Fe so they balance each other]” (Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/6bcd1h/the_adventure_of_the_mistyped_consulting/?st=j2rpyeh3&sh=78ab53b5)
“Te is objective because it considers phenomena in the outside world, and
implicitly distrusts anything of the inside world. It uses logic to come to
conclusions about concrete things using observable facts.
Ti on the other hand distrusts the outside world, considering facts to be
unreliable because they are a confluence of various phenomena and what exactly
the fact implies is up for grabs. It uses its perception of the outside world
to discover the underlying principles that govern the world, all couched in
terms that are separate from facts of the world. In this case logic is directed
at the intangible, and because the principles that are used are dependent on
the observations of the user, it's very much subjective.” (Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/6dsehc/ti_question/?st=j38nnon7&sh=5289cd90)
Also I HAVE to quote some important parts from this wonderful article: http://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com/articles/1-Information-Domains
Also I HAVE to quote some important parts from this wonderful article: http://wholesocionics.herokuapp.com/articles/1-Information-Domains
“While Te is responsible for gathering data, Ti seeks to limit data. For
example, here are some facts:
Chickens have two legs.
Turkeys have two legs.
Hummingbirds have two legs.
Te is responsible for gathering facts like this. However, the human mind
has only so much capacity to remember facts; Ti is what reduces the mental load
by joining facts together into a framework or into a reduced set of facts. In
the above case, Ti might form the conclusion "Birds have two legs." I
have no idea whether in fact this is true or not, but it doesn't matter: Ti is
an introverted element and thus does not refer to the outside world in
determining what kind of simplifications to make in reducing facts, it only
considers whether facts are consistent with each other. If, however, Ti created
a rule like "Birds have two legs" and Te found a bird that had five
legs, this would activate Ti to reconsider its beliefs. If Te gathers data
which Ti has evaluated as inconsistent with known facts and rules, then this
results in conflict between Te and Ti. (This conflict is sometimes referred to
as cognitive dissonance.)”
“Te is more goldfishy in nature. So, it really doesn't generalize, it just
observes facts. For example:
Te: A bird had two legs!
Ti: Hm, all birds must have two legs.
Te: A bird had five legs!
Ti: But you said birds have two legs!
Te: No I said the first one had two legs, and it did. The second had five.
Ti: Fine. Then birds must have either two or five legs.” (Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/6fv32j/ti_vs_te_dilemma_i_need_help_answering_some/dilfg1r/?context=3&st=j3o9cs5e&sh=828aabf5)
"As I understand them, both Ti and Te are capable of overgeneralizing
or nitpicking depending on the context.
Ti is consistency-based. By this, I mean that it is concerned with whether
a given set of data, assumptions, conclusions, etc. are consistent with each
other. It seeks to form causal and other logical links between things (e.g: all
birds have two legs) and will by necessity make generalizations when doing so.
These internals models are not necessarily fixed, however, and when conflicting
data is presented, a healthy Ti-user will question both the new data and their
own model until a resolution is found. Even a single five-legged bird will
cause Ti to seek a resolution - in this sense it can be extremely nitpicky. It
wants a perfectly consistent model.
Te is results-based. The key question is "will this work?" It is
most concerned not with internal consistency, but with consistency between
input and output, so to speak. If I want C to happen, what must be done? Should
I do A? B? Both? Neither? Notice that Te, like Ti, is looking for causal and
logical relationships. The difference is that Te focuses on the external world
of action -> implication, while Ti focuses on the internal world of
model-building and understanding. So while a Ti user nitpicks details with
their model, they are prone to generalize the actual facts of the case.
Similarly, a Te user can be nitpicky with the immediately relevant facts of a
situation, but their internal model will often be generalized or oversimplified
if they don't see how those internal details affect the outcome.
So, Te might criticize Ti for being too abstract and impractical, taking
Ti's carefully constructed theory and demonstrating that, if applied in
reality, it would break. Similarly, Ti might criticize Te for being too shallow
or situational in their understanding, taking Te's refined system and
demonstrating an inherent logical fallacy or providing a set of preconditions
in which the outcome would theoretically change.
Fi and Fe are similar, in that Fi develops and refines a deep personal
moral/feeling model while Fe seeks primarily to understand how to work with and
impact a given moral/feeling environment. Fi will tend to nitpick their own
model and oversimplify external reality, while Fe will tend to nitpick
immediately applicable value/feeling details and oversimplify the underlying
feeling system." (Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/6fv32j/ti_vs_te_dilemma_i_need_help_answering_some/dilc7ww/?context=3&st=j3ne81tb&sh=385dcf31)
“Another example: Let's say you want to make a tower out of random
irregular objects. For example a book, an eraser, a pencil and a cup.
A Te approach would be to think of the tower as a list. And try to reduce
variables to a minimum. For instance, you would only use the book closed to
keep variables down. If you use every object in only one way you only have 24
combinations in total. That way you can be sure that you make the best choice.
Then you can decide to put the book with the biggest base first. So you put the
book first, then the cup, the eraser and the pencil. Done.
Ti, on the other hand, would encourage you to pick two objects and try to
add more. Feel them, consider all the possibilities. Once you are very familiar
with each object you can picture everything in your mind. You can see how they
fit and how they interact with each other in time. But you don't longer think
in 'objects', you think in gestals. You see everything as a fluid. For
instance, you consider now the table and your breath as part of the system. You
are familiar with the everything in a way that you can consider things like
keeping the book open, or taking pages out of it and add them elsewhere to keep
balance. After playing with everything a little you see how it would work best
and you just do it.” (Source: http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin/content.php/134-Lenore-Thomson-MBTI-Functions)
Ti TWISTS FACTS TO SUIT
THEORIES WHILE TE TWISTS THEORIES TO SUIT FACTS!!! (that is, of course, when the two
conflict. When the theory and fact don’t match up perfectly the Ti is changing
the fact first while Te is changing the theory first, it takes a lot for a Ti
user to change theory or Te user to change fact.)
The reason Ti is always adapting, changing and post-processing all the already
working systems is to make them more power saving. If the Ti system has like a
very little detail that could be changed to make it more efficient they’re
going to change it internally. Te users might find Ti users over-complicating
stuff too much, Te is more or less “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!”. The
reason “Ti fixes stuff that ain’t broke” is, like I said, to make it a little
more efficient. A Te user seeing a Ti user change little things might think
that they are breaking a system apart and “Fixing stuff that ain’t broke”, but
the real thing is that for a Ti user it’s not a very big deal, they are
CONSTANTLY changing and adapting their
internal logic systems as they gain more knowledge and experience. They do
things “Their way”, Te users go by the book much more but that doesn’t mean
they are blind brainwashed sheep (ok, some
are but not all), they are able to change and adapt their systems but they will
do if there is a good ‘cause to do so, again, I will say the classic “if it
ain’t broke don’t fix it”. If the system actually IS broke they are able to
make a change. Otherwise they will not to keep things simple. Often Ti users
are also seen by Te users as lazy since Te is much more goal-oriented, and
that’s true, for example, if someone has a meeting at 6:00 and it takes 20
minutes to get there, the Te user might just go there 15 minutes early to make
sure they aren’t late while a Ti ideal would be to be EXACTLY one time, maybe
they’ll get start going there at like 5:37 or something like that, so they are
there 3 minutes earlier. That’s a very good example of Te being focused on efficiency and Ti being focused on energy saving.
When Te users develop the best
versions of themselves they are like walking tanks of sustainable systems.
When Ti users develop the best
versions of themselves they are the innovators of new paradigms, literally
altering how we understand and see reality.
Personalities with Te as their first JUDGING
function are xxTJ (ESTJ, ISTJ, ENTJ, INTJ) while personalities with Ti as their
first JUDGING function are xxTP (ESTP, ISTP, ENTP, INTP).
VERY IMPORTANT NOTE ABOUT THINKING VS FEELING: Keep in mind that like Ti
and Te, feeling functions are very analytical at nature too. While thinking is
about universal truths, feeling is about the connection between the truths. Fx
is all about how entities communicate with each other while Tx defines what
those entities actually are. Because thinking functions are all about what the
entities are, the only way to classify information for the thinkers is valid/invalid (or true/false). Feeling
functions also formed systems according to how the entities influenced each
other, coming to the conclusion that you can either influence someone in a good
or a bad way (positive or negative energy), thus, coming up with some values/morals/ethics, so it classifies
information on whether it has a positive (Good) or a negative (bad) impact,
thus, the relationship between entities is either good/evil.
Additional note about Ti vs. Fi: They
are both SUBJECTIVE functions, they have their own ways of doing things (Ti) or
being/existing (Fi), the difference is that Fi searches for subjective truth
(What it means to ME) while Ti is searching for objective truth (What it IS!).
The thing is that both of them are subjective and unconventional on how to get
there. They both have the same path but opposite destination points. Ti is
reaching objective truth in a subjective way while Fi is searching for
meaning/subjective truth, still, in a subjective way. That's the reason why Fi
users tend to be more artistic and Ti users more scientific. That doesn't mean
Ti users can't be artistic or emotional and Fi users are dumb...
Also I would like to quote a
little from this amazing post/article from personalitycafe: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/3074-ti-v-fi-closer-look.html
“Ti is an abstract deductive reasoning process. Would it be correct to say that Ti focuses on stripping away at the superficial side of any given object/situation to find the inner and pure objective information? Ti then goes to define and ultimately fit the piece of information into an internal model of all objective information collected thus far.
“Ti is an abstract deductive reasoning process. Would it be correct to say that Ti focuses on stripping away at the superficial side of any given object/situation to find the inner and pure objective information? Ti then goes to define and ultimately fit the piece of information into an internal model of all objective information collected thus far.
(…)The larger problems require varying amounts of time, energy, and logical
processing until everything fits once again. This is how Ti can pinpoint
inconsistencies from miles away, the information they received is not the
proper shape or not even from the same puzzle as they understand the world to
function.
Fi would then be an abstract integration process taking into account pure
subjective information or 'feelings'. The internal world model is constructed
less of logical systems as Ti. Fi focuses less on defining new information and
more on simply understanding and then integrating it to the basic framework
already in place. Like conducting and building a song one instrumental piece at
a time. Fi is focused on how things work together, and dissonance is readily
apparent. A distinction from the inconsistency targeting of Ti where things
must fit, Fi can work with small inconsistencies as long as the bigger picture
can still function as whole.
Objectivity and subjectivity are a large separation in the functions. Fi types are very close to their inner feelings, understand them, yet the objectivity of language prevents them from expressing this portion of their being. Fi then needs to take subjective viewpoints into account in their internal world model because that is the part world they best understand and they see it to affect their worldview greatly. This is not to say they ignore objectivity, yet a danger zone for Fi (Dom Fi especially) is to ignore objective truth that doesn't harmonize with their subjective truth resulting in either an overly-emotional or a self-centered person (or both, depending on your perspective). Ti, on the other hand, is either does not understand it like Fi can (much like Fi has a harder time with deductive reasoning of objective qualities), or deems it irrelevant. An unbalanced Ti would be entirely disconnected with the human element leaving their world model incomplete and too rigid for that sort of information. (Ironically becoming too subjective in their objectivity)”
Objectivity and subjectivity are a large separation in the functions. Fi types are very close to their inner feelings, understand them, yet the objectivity of language prevents them from expressing this portion of their being. Fi then needs to take subjective viewpoints into account in their internal world model because that is the part world they best understand and they see it to affect their worldview greatly. This is not to say they ignore objectivity, yet a danger zone for Fi (Dom Fi especially) is to ignore objective truth that doesn't harmonize with their subjective truth resulting in either an overly-emotional or a self-centered person (or both, depending on your perspective). Ti, on the other hand, is either does not understand it like Fi can (much like Fi has a harder time with deductive reasoning of objective qualities), or deems it irrelevant. An unbalanced Ti would be entirely disconnected with the human element leaving their world model incomplete and too rigid for that sort of information. (Ironically becoming too subjective in their objectivity)”
Another good article about Ti vs.
Fi is this: http://personalityjunkie.com/05/introverted-feeling-fi-vs-introverted-thinking-ti/
Additional note about Te vs. Fe: They both are extroverted
(objective) judging functions. The main difference between the two is that
while Te is about objective truths that can be expressed at any time and place,
“facts” at the most accurate sense of that word while Fe is about the
relationship between 2 or more entities at specific space and time. I would
have said that Fe is more subjective than Te but they’re both extroverted
functions and I find “subjective” a very ambiguous term because after all the
energy exchange between the object and the subject are the same so both are as
equally objective. A better term to use is that Fe is more contextual, it is used in a specific context while Te is much more
universal. (same thing with intuition and sensing, intuition is much more
universal while sensing is context based). Think about the difference between
maths and language. Mathematics is a Te concept, it can be used at any context,
any space and time and it will always stay true. Language is just a form of
communication between humans, it is in no way “general truth”, it’s about the
relationship between two or more entities. When we say 1+1=2 it is both a Te
concept and a Fe concept. What is Fe is the words/symbols used in the language
I wrote that, the numbers “1” and “2” and the mathematical signs “=” and “+”
are all Fe concepts while the actual meaning behind the phrase “1+1=2” is a Te
concept. When we say “1+1=2” it is both an objective truth (Te) and a context
based communication approach (Fe). It is objective in the assumption that we
look at the meaning behind those symbols and subjective/nongeneraltruth in the
way that we just look at what is front of us, symbols like “1”, “2”, “+” and
“=”.
Perceiving functions:
The four perceiving
functions (to absorb information) are:
Ne (extroverted
iNtuition), Ni (introverted iNtuition), Se (extroverted Sensing), Si
(introverted Sensing). The two iNtuition functions are preoccupied
with what COULD BE, while the two
Sensing functions are preoccupied with what IS (your five senses). I will go through Ni vs. Ne first and then
explain Si vs. Se.
Ni vs. Ne: As I said, both of these functions are preoccupied with what COULD BE, the
difference is Ne is extroverted (External) while Ni is introverted (Internal)
Ne sees
an object, a thing, A SINGLE PIECE OF INFORMATION, and has a sort of
"Explosion of ideas" of what it could expand to in the future. Ne
sees a million ways a thing can develop in the future. Ni is the opposite, Ni
gathers a million pieces of information, Ni is preoccupied always with the
"big picture" only to see a single way that it could develop in the
future.
Now, Ni
is sometimes ironically called "Black magic", but I want to make clear that it can't blindly predict the future like witches, what it does is noticing patterns of how things evolved
through time in the past and applying it to the future.
(Example): I had an INFJ (Ni over Ne) tell me that when they were 4 years old
they found confusing how children had to be explained to not touch the hot
stove, the Ni user saw that in the past it went from a little red to much more
and more red-ish as seconds passed so when they saw that it got a little red
they got reminded instantly of the pattern and realized that in the future it
will get hotter and hotter so they don't have to touch it. Now this is very
basic 4 year old Ni, anyone with a little brain can do this at a reasonable
age, but a 4 year old that is not a Ni user should be alarmed about these
things. Now the ultimate question: Can
Ni see in the future? Basically yes, this kid saw in the future what
will happen with the hot stove so basically it can, but not in the
superstitious way everyone thinks it does, it is not black magic! Also, most of these
“visions” of the future come more or less as gut feelings to the user, the
actual recognition of the patterns is unconscious.
Ne is
good at brainstorming; it works like an explosion of ideas while Ni is always
focused on one thing. Ne simply can't focus on one path in the future since it
sees a million paths that idea can grow into. I heard about Ne users that they
are very undecided of what they want to do in the future, they see a hundred
career paths that they could go into and they don’t know which one to choose.
Ni users
are pretty sure of what they want to do in the future most of the time, they
usually have 1-2-3 things they obsess on over the course of their lives and
become perfectionists.
Also, Ni
is comparing every individual element to how it relates to others. Think about
math. Or physics. Generally to get a full result you need an unit of measure.
Ni doesn’t work in an unit of measure. Do you know the famous meme “banana for
scale” thing? Well Ni never has a “scale”, that scale is added by a(n
extroverted) judging
function (trying to bring Ni to reality usefulness). Ni is only comparing
objects. It has its own scales but not relating to the real world. Let’s think
about the universe for a little. If Ni had the whole universe in its system, it
can use any object in the universe as scale, but when working in the REAL
universe, it has to be post-processes by Te or Fe to be accurate. Internal
frame of the world =/= actual world for Ni.
Ni monologue:
“How does this piece of information compare to everything I’ve ever
experienced, felt, thought and imagined in my life?”
Ne looks
for novel outcomes and imagines how the things around you could be changed into
other, more interesting things. Ne sees new information as part of a larger,
emerging, as of yet unseen pattern that extends far beyond the self, and whose
meaning will continue to change as the context grows and we discover more of
the all-encompassing pattern. Rather than directly confront an issue, Ne will
often broaden the context until the issue seems insignificant by comparison to
the much bigger and more expansive ideas it imagines. Rather than imagine
different ways we could change the outside world, Ni acknowledges many
different ways we could change the subjective meaning of things to ourselves by
looking at them from different angles. Rather than directly confront an issue,
Ni will often solve problems by simply looking at them from a different angle.
Doing a bunch of community service sucks? Just think of it as an opportunity to
get lots of exercise! Note that Ni doesn't think about how to change the outer
world the way Ne does; it only thinks about how to change *the way we
interpret* the outer world. Ni leads you to try and see "through the smoke
and mirrors" to what is REALLY going on below the surface, that other
people are not perceptive enough to pick up on...so in its unhealthy form, it
turns into conspiracy theories…
“More specifically it wonders how a
perceived theme fits with all the other perceived themes, or how all these
different sequences of interactions fit together. To contrast it with Ne; Ne
wonders about specific sequences of interactions, it focuses on the idea itself
and where it leads. Ni doesn't care all that much about where any specific idea
leads; it cares about how it interacts with all the other ideas. The
"trajectory" you get from Ni is because the way different sequences
of interactions interact with one another is a process of elimination, you're
left with less and less probable options the more themes you throw into the
picture, a "best drawn line" is naturally created.”(Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/65hr6k/sini/?st=j2oe5yu2&sh=7e879881)
“Ni similarly isn't "essences of
objects", everything you have any comprehension of is an essence, an
abstraction. Are Ni doms generally interested in what makes an apple an apple?
Of course not, who cares what specifically goes into the categorization of an
apple, it's an apple, the specifics of what makes it an apple is of no
relevance or interest. Now if an Ni dom on the other hand had thought a lot
about culture, they might wonder what the apple symbolically represents within
said culture and why, what is it about it that gives it that symbolic
representation? What does it have in common or what separates it from other
symbolic representations of similar objects? They might also wonder about how
the concept of categorization relates to information processing, what does it
say about our information processing? Or neither of those might be interesting
thoughts because they're obsessed about something completely different and
couldn't care less about culture or information processing.
Ni only cares about essences in the
context of "how does this relate to my overall perspective?", how
does it relate to everything else I've seen, experienced and imagined? What
connects a fish, a donkey and horse poop is probably not a very interesting
question and a Ni dom isn't going to try to find the essence connecting those
3, because it has no relevance to them.”(Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/65b1og/the_power_of_words_abstraction_and_seni/?st=j2oe8en0&sh=d5ffbefd)
Also, Ni
sees the world in symbols and metaphors. Its metaphors and analogies are
subjective to the self, because as Carl
Jung said (not quote, just what I remember from memory): “An introverted iNtuitor
can’t share these visions to the world, it would make people think he’s crazy!
For example I had a patient once come to me once and she was like “I GOT A
SNAKE IN MY STOMACH” and I was like “WTF???” and she was like “YEAH, THERE’S A
SNAKE IN MY STOMACH” and I was like “How tf can a snake be in your stomach???”
and she was like “Oh wait, it’s not an actual snake, but it feels like one!”
(Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_7DpbJ1xFg&t=531s)
See the
“thing” here? Ni has its own metaphors that aren’t very objective and
accessible to the world like the Ne metaphors are. Ni is comparing the stomach
pain to everything the user felt and thought in his/her life and immediately
saw a connection between snakes and pain, using “snakes” as a metaphor for
pain. Unfortunately the user forgot to post-process it with Te (for INTJs) or
Fe (with INFJs) and people thought she was crazy.
(PATTERNS): First, I want to make the clear that the patterns are searched and
formed unconsciously, the user won’t actively seek patterns, they probably
don’t even know that all of their crazy ideas are from PATTERNS. (unless they
know about cognitive functions). Now I said that the way Ni has their path into
the future is through seeing patterns of how events happened through time, but
how do you think Ne knows all these different ways a situation can go? They do
that too! While Ni sees patterns in the internal world of an idea, focused on
how a single idea evolved through time, Ne sees patterns in the external world
around them, finding the hidden meaning behind and in-between things, “Reading
through the lines”. They see interconnections in the external world of an idea,
how the idea relates to other ideas and how everything is connected and how it
could go in the future. Ni instead sees how other external ideas and factors
influenced the idea through time and how it got to this present point.
(PATHS):
Also, I would like to talk a little
about paths and time. Ni is described
as having a set path that it must follow with a clear, but, unknown
destination. They have this gut feeling that this is the way it goes, like
there’s some sort of “light at the end of the road” without knowing what the
light gives them. They have a clear set destination that is unknown. Ne, as always,
is reversed. Ne sees the end goals very clearly and has no clear “path”, they
have a million paths that they can follow and they want to get to know and
experience all of them. Ni has the destination as the end result and the path
there is the starting point. Ne has the destinations as a starting point and
the path is the end result.
(Puzzle
Analogy): Imagine a puzzle, Ni is having most of the puzzle done, especially
the corners (that's what it needs) and fills what is missing. Ne has the center
pieces (that's what it needs) and slowly goes in all the ways to fill the
puzzle.
Ni is
very good to see what is missing while Ne is good to see what could be
improved.
(Example):
In a haunted house, Ni will tell the user “I have a gut feeling like there
might be something behind the door” while Ne would tell the user “Imagine how
random would be for someone to pop out the door right now hahah, but what are
the chances?”.
(Astronomy Analogy): Ne vs. Ni is also like
supernova vs. nebula: An appropriate visual representation of Ne would be that
of a supernova. What starts as a star explodes into all of its properties
removed from the object itself and completely deconstructed. Ne does a similar
thing. It completely deconstructs an object according to the ideas, symbols,
systems, what have you associated with that object. Ni is much like a nebula. A
nebula, if you don’t already know, is a cloud of particulate and other forms of
matter in space that slowly forms into a star system. Over time, what looks
like an amorphous blob begins to collapse in on itself until a star is formed
and possibly planets as well. These solar systems that are formed are there for
the long term. Ni is much the same way. The systems and models that Ni forms
are often very much long-term models and systems that will stand the test of
time and hold up well under scrutiny. This is why Ni is often described as the
long-term system building function. The more relevant information an Ni user
possesses, the stronger the system that is being built. The less information a
Ni user possesses, the weaker the system that is being built or the system may
simply never coalesce.
One thing that is heard often about Ne
is that it is all about making connections. That is indeed true, but Ne needs
to have a correct base to jump off of in order to make the correct connections.
It is my belief that Ne on its own can make connections based on all of the
possibilities it intuits, but those connections will have little relevance to
the outside world. The resulting structure would look more like a giant ball of
tangled Christmas lights a la Christmas Vacation rather than a structured and
organized web. (Source
for astronomy analogy and the other paragraph: http://personalitycafe.com/articles/84275-cognitive-function-ne-vs-ni.html
)
“Ne is like an excited young
bird that can’t fly looking at the sky and the world of possibilities. Ni is
like an eagle flying very high looking at the world down, like those video
games where you have “bird’s eye view” or something like that.”
Also I
would love to make clear before moving on what some people mean when they say
that Ni and Ne are “unconscious processes”. Half of
the process of our iNtuitive functions is hidden from us. The way a Sensing
function works it’s that it is directly sent to the user without any
post-processing done by any judging function. A Se user would just see a tree
on the sidewalk and think “oh there’s a tree”. Now think about Ne for example.
Is a Ne user first going to realize that an asteroid is going to hit earth just
‘cause they can imagine it before realizing that it’s EXTREMELY improbable?
(like 0.0000001%) Probably not. Information from our iNtuitive functions is
firstly post-processed by the judging function paired with it and THEN sent to
the user so it doesn’t make us go insane thinking we’re going to die every 0.1
seconds.
Ni and Ne
are half-unconscious to keep us sane.
So what
Ni actually does is seeing patterns of how things in the past evolved through
time and applying it to the future and making interconnections.
"How
does this new piece of information compare to everything I have ever thought,
imagined, felt, experienced, etc."
As a
result it will make PERSONAL SUBJECTIVE interconnections that (most of the
time) are kept personal because they're based on personal subjective
experience, for example the crazy woman Jung had as a pacient that said that
"snakes are in her stomach". In her case, snakes were often seen a SYMBOL
of pain, so when she has stomach pain she will immediately think of snakes.
But, as I
said, half of the process of the iNtuitive functions is unconscious to keep us
sane so for Ni most of the time the pattern recognition is hidden from the
user.
A Ni user
might not actually think about how things were in the past and what the interconnections
are, some connections just "happen", they often report just looking
at something for long enough until they out of nowhere come with an answer.
So Ni
users might see some interconnections that others might not notice.
As a
result of those connections, they visualize (And not just with sight, with all
5 senses) everything as symbols and metaphors. This is the part that is
actually conscious to them.
So like I
said, they might associate pain with snakes or something like that, snakes
being a symbol, that's why xNxJs are drawn to SYMBOLISM.
Ne has a
form of symbolism and metaphors too but they're objective so when a Ne user
makes an analogy most people will agree with him (maybe without ISxx types
'cause they have very low Ne (inferior/PoLR))
Ni users
always compare things to each other so they think in metaphors and figurative
terms but they have to be post-processed by a judging function (Fe/Te) to come
to the world.
Personality
types with Ne as their first PERCIEVING function are xNxP (ENTP, INTP, ENFP,
INFP) while personalities types with Ni as their first PERCIEVING function are
xNxJ (INFJ, ENFJ, INTJ, ENTJ).
Si vs. Se: Because extroverted functions work by
how the subject (the user) can affect the object (the environment in sensing’s
case), Extroverted Sensing (Se) occurs by way of the five primary senses
(sight, sound, touch, smell, and taste). Due to its introverted nature, the
introverted cousin of sensation works by how the environment can affect the
user so as a result, Introverted Sensing (Si), by contrast, relates to inner
bodily sensations such as pain, hunger, thirst, internal temperature, numbness,
tingling, muscle tension, etc. Both Se and Si are critical for our physical
survival, delivering vital sensory feedback from within and without. There have
surely been times in our evolutionary past in which a well-developed Se was
more beneficial to survival, as well as times where Si proved especially
important. Se types, for instance, were likely better suited for hunting tasks
because of their ability to notice and respond to important details in the
environment. Si types, by contrast, may have been better at discerning whether
food or water was poisonous because of their inner sensitivity. Se users
generally are in more extreme sports and like to live life to the fullest while
Si are the opposite, they are very concerned about their health and well-being.
(Source: http://personalityjunkie.com/extraverted-sensing-se-vs-introverted-sensing-si/
)
Se vs. Si doesn't only stop at
this, they also relate to TIME a lot more. Se lives in the exact present moment
while Si stores past information as data. Se is good at sports and present tasks
focused on reflexes and fast responses; they are very focused on what is
happening around them. Si on the other hand, is focused on the past and is very
good at remembering specific sensory details of an event. For example, in a
situation with crime involved, Se would be good at thinking fast and acting in
the moment of the crime involved while Si would be amazing at reporting the
crime to the police because they remembered the event in very good detail, they
will explain how the criminal looked, what the color of the shirt was, the
registration plate numbers of his car he ran away with, and more important the
damage done and what the difference between the current state of the situation
and the past situation is etc.
The belief that Si is JUST about
physical comfort, inner bodily sensations and recall of the past is flawed
however. Si is more concerned with the general impact between entities (not to
be confused with energy exchange, that’s Fi/Fe) than what the entities are (Se)
(not to be confused with their classification, that’s Ti and Te). Si is a
perception of the physical world that is more concerned with the psychological
reaction to objects than their objective qualities (Se). Si=how it affects me. Often
Si is very subjective and personal in its perception, people using the process
of Si (or Si doms) might act like they are **seeing** (or the other 4 senses
other than sight) something different from everyone else, “this is how I sense
it”. Si, in a sense, sees the background
of the physical world. The important thing isn’t the object, but its
mirror-image in the psyche. Objects don’t only appear in their present instance
(as Se sees them) but also with a vague sense of their past and future,
“somewhat as a million-year-old-consciousness might see them”. As this article
says: https://otterdot.tumblr.com/search/Si .
While Se would point out what the
current situation of the world is, Si would point out what the difference
between the current situation and the past situation is. (Ni would point out
what the impact will be in the future if you make a change now)
People engaging in the use of Si
are often oriented by the intensity of their subjective perceptions, rather
than the intensity of external stimuli. As a
result, it’s impossible for an outsider to reliably predict what will excite or
make an impression on him. This can manifest as anything from a very subjective
and unnecessary detail-oriented behavior “I think I like ice-cream 54.3682%
from how much I like fries” just because that specific number “felt” good to
the user (Se would point out exactly what the number is, not because “it felt
right” to him). This can also manifest as just finding that extremely
comfortable spot on the couch that only you find comfortable “differs from
person to person” or that sweet sweet spot you need to scratch. People with
high use of Se would think that everyone senses the exact same thing, so they
are often surprised when you didn’t experience as much pleasure in that massage
chair at the mall.
Additional note about Si vs. Ni: These two functions, like Ti vs.
Fi, do the opposite thing in the exact same way. Ni is looking at how things
evolved through time in the past and applying it to the present/future. Si is
looking at the present (what IS, not
what COULD BE) and comparing it to the past, remembering how things were back
then and making a library of things stocked right in the moment they happened
and using it as experience for the future. Ni is from past to future/present
while Si is from future/present to past. Si has a library built from the past
of sensory data, “visual memory” and things like that while Ni has a library
from the past built of abstract data, how one event relates to another,
symbolism and things like that. Si is literally like Wikipedia, a lot of exact
and concrete facts while Ni is living in metaphors and symbolism, Ni tries to
get the “Essence of the objects” and have the overall idea of what the events
were and how and why it happened. Si has exact memories of what things are, Si
is very detail-oriented while Ni is seeing how one event relates to the other
and another one and so on and so forth, making some sort of “chain of events”.
Remember that this last paragraph is unconscious for Ni, Ni users won’t be
aware of how the interconnections were made (looking at the past and applying
it to the future by seeing patterns), they will only be aware of the end
result: the interconnections. Si users will be conscious of the whole process
though.
(Example in music): For example, Mike Shinoda (rapper),
writes most of his songs as stories. He is an ENFJ, which has Ni as their
secondary function, which will make them write some stories a lot. Listen to
songs like “Kenji” and “Red To Black” by him. The reason a Ni user would write
lyrics in some sort of story-telling mode is because Ni remembers past
information too, it’s not only future oriented! Let me explain it with a
history book example.
(History example): If functions were history books, Si
would be like most books are today. They would describe WHAT happened in
detail, like most books do, with exact numbers for time of the event and place.
Ni is not really about WHAT happened, it is about how the things that happen
relate to each other. Since Ni is looking at patterns of how things evolved
through time, a history book that would be Ni-like would not be very focused on
WHAT happened, rather it would tell that this and this and this happened and
because of all these 3 things, it lead that after it ‘caused this and because
of that this also happened and because of that this also happened and that led
to this and that and because of that… etc. Ni is about how the events in the
past relate to each other, neglecting unimportant details. That’s why most of
Mike Shinoda’s raps are very story-telling, it is seeing how an event leads to
each other and so on and so forth.
Regarding impacts done, Si is more
likely to really notice the differences and impacts that were from past “Look
at what that thing did to our city! I notice the difference between how it was
before and how it is now!” while Ni would be future-oriented “Don’t invest in
that bank because this will happen!”.
However, Si is like an archivist
and attempts to store its perceptions of reality as untouched as possible.
Ni wants to merge ideas using the
unconscious for them to resurface later.
An interesting perspective to look
at it is this:
“From disscussions with Ni dominants on other forums, I have found out the
difference between Si and Ni. It ain't tradition, or memories, or imagination.
No, none of that. It is models vs systems.
First, some definitions:
System: A set of interacting or interdependent components forming an
integrated whole
Model: A description of a system using mathematical concepts and language
(obviously, not using mathematics here, but you get the idea)
Now, the difference is that Ni has faith in systems, while Si has faith in
models. Say a judging function points out that Ni is wrong:
Ni: "Ok, I'll change the models to better fit the system." (trust
that the system is accurate)
But if a judging function points out Si is wrong:
"Ok, I'll change the system to better fit the models." (trust
that the models are accurate)
Because Ni puts so much faith in systems, if a system is proven wrong in
even one aspect, the whole thing, says Ni, should be thrown out. Because Si
puts so much faith in models, if a model is proven wrong in even one aspect,
the whole thing, says Si, should be thrown out. It is like a broken foundation
To Ni, Si's approach might seem stubborn and unyielding-why not get better
models? To Si, Ni's approach seems almost like moving the goalposts.” (Source: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/myers-briggs-and-jungian-cognitive-functions/52749-si-vs-ni-aint-tradition.html)
“Ni is an abstract map of possibilities which you explore literally
with Se.
Si is a literal map which you explore abstractly with Ne.” – (source: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/113003-ni-vs-si-what-hell-difference.html)
Si is a literal map which you explore abstractly with Ne.” – (source: http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/113003-ni-vs-si-what-hell-difference.html)
Mostly Si users (and Ne) think of
the past mostly in first person, there's a more direct connection between the
subject and object while thinking about experiences, feelings, sensations, etc.
experienced in the past. Ni users (and Se) report seeing the past more detached
like in third person., only doing so to focus on the future (Ni) and/or present
(Se).
I would also like to copy-paste an amazing reddit post I found
about Si vs. Ni (source:
https://www.reddit.com/r/mbti/comments/65hr6k/sini/?st=j1ixirh8&sh=47896b87)
"Everyone thinks of the past and utilizes it to understand the world, relating something to your past isn't Si. Si connection to the past is again more concrete, specific events and their relation to the self. Both a Ni dom and a Si dom can have theories as to how say being abused as a child shaped them, but a Ni dom is likely to get there via a bunch of themes in their lives and "oh, it's because I was abused as a child" is the obvious conclusion. The Si dom is likely to focus on being abused as a child specifically and focus on how that relates to the self, the relation can be however abstract but the event and the self have a direct connection. The output can at times look identical, the Si dom can get to the same themes in their life but they'll do so with the specific event as their anchor. The Ni dom on the other hand has the themes as their anchor and the specific events is just a detached conclusion."
"Everyone thinks of the past and utilizes it to understand the world, relating something to your past isn't Si. Si connection to the past is again more concrete, specific events and their relation to the self. Both a Ni dom and a Si dom can have theories as to how say being abused as a child shaped them, but a Ni dom is likely to get there via a bunch of themes in their lives and "oh, it's because I was abused as a child" is the obvious conclusion. The Si dom is likely to focus on being abused as a child specifically and focus on how that relates to the self, the relation can be however abstract but the event and the self have a direct connection. The output can at times look identical, the Si dom can get to the same themes in their life but they'll do so with the specific event as their anchor. The Ni dom on the other hand has the themes as their anchor and the specific events is just a detached conclusion."
This is why Si is far more linear, because the connection
between the subject and the object is direct, despite how abstract/concrete it
is. "Object" is used loosely here, it can be an event, an idea or an
actual object. "It makes me uncomfortable to think about it" is
something you're more likely to hear from an Si user.
The relation Si users draw is often "sensory", what it
looks like to them or what it makes them feel like, the latter being why Si is
generally more emotional, especially in a sentimental way, but also why Si has
a very "bodily connection". The relation can also be entirely
abstract though, "what makes an apple an apple to me?", you can use
just about anything to relate to it, but the important thing is that there is a
direct connection between the "subject" as in you and the
"object" which is really anything that isn't the subject. The themes
you derive are anchored to something.
Ni on the other hand doesn't care about what the connection
between a car and them is, it's a car, there's a detachment from the
"self" with Ni. Ni anchors to themes, which more accurately would be
described as sequences of interactions between objects, imaginary or actual
makes no difference. More specifically it wonders how a perceived theme fits
with all the other perceived themes, or how all these different sequences of
interactions fit together. To contrast it with Ne; Ne wonders about specific
sequences of interactions, it focuses on the idea itself and where it leads. Ni
doesn't care all that much about where any specific idea leads, it cares about
how it interacts with all the other ideas. The "trajectory" you get
from Ni is because the way different sequences of interactions interact with
one another is a process of elimination, you're left with less and less
probable options the more themes you throw into the picture, a "best drawn
line" is naturally created.
So to sum it up; the functions are similar, the difference is in
the nuances, in what the anchors of the perception is. With Si you get specific
anchors between the self and "objects", a connection between the
"self" and something. With Ni the anchor is sequences of
interactions, it's an "object to object" relation in the subjective
mind, the self is removed. "I was abused" is a conclusion derived
from a bunch of themes for the Ni dom, whereas "I was abused" or an
event of abuse is the anchor from which themes are derived for the Si dom. They
will very often end up looking similar, and anyone is capable of using either
anchor, but the Ni dom habitually does one and the Si dom the other.
Disclaimer: There are judging functions involved in any given
example here, I don't believe isolated examples are possible or useful. The
terminology is also a bunch of jargon.
Additional note about Se vs. Ne: The
only thing I have to add is while Se is all about perceiving the most immediate
reality in front of you (through the 5 but not really 5 senses cuz there are
more than 5) Ne is about alternate realities, all the possible scenarios
that could happen from the most realistic to the most fantastic.
Now let’s take a look at those so
called 8 “roles” or “slots” that the 8 described functions can go into.
Firstly, we must know we need to
know what functions work together, what functions don't, what can't and how.
Most schools of taught would agree that what I like to call “opposite functions” cancel each other.
Arguments could be made that you could reach a balance (so it’s either 78% one
and 22% the other or 50/50 or 60/40 etc.) or that you can switch between them
very fast though. These functions I call “opposite” are of the same attitude
(both introverted or extroverted) and on the opposite end of their axis. A
“fighting relationship” is between the two elements of the pairs, one struggles
to take control of the other one. The relationship between them is one that
works similarly, has the same starting point but reasons differently, thus
coming to the conclusion that they have the same start point but opposite
destinations. Having opposite destinations would mean you would have to choose
one, you can’t use both at the same time completely and having the same “Start
point” would make them fight for the same place in your cognition.
The pairs of opposite functions are as follows: Ti with Fi, Te with Fe, Si with
Ni and Se with Ne.
As you can only use one of the two
at a time, it would mean that you can have four basic “slots” a function goes,
and only one of the two can be here.
We found out that every type
chooses one of the two functions as preference, so between the two in a pair
one will always take over the other one, the suppressed one coming in control
in rare cases. The four functions that are in control MOST of the time are your
MAIN STACK while the ones coming in control rarely are called your SHADOW
FUNCTIONS.
We could define the four slots of
function as follows:
-Ni and Si: Introverted perceiving functions (Pi for short): Internal stocking
of information; memory and experience.
-Ne and Se: Extroverted perceiving functions (Pe for short): External taking of
new information; observation.
-Ti and Fi: Introverted judging functions (Ji for short): Internal judgment and
processing of information; subjectiveness.
-Te and Fe: Extroverted judging functions (Je for short): External judgment and
processing of information; objectiveness.
The types that prefer Si over Ni,
Fe over Te, Ti over Fi and Ne over Se are called the “Alpha quadra”: INTP,
ENTP, ISFJ, ESFJ.
The types that prefer Ni over Si,
Fe over Te, Ti over Fi and Se over Ne are called the “Beta quadra”: INFJ, ENFJ,
ISTP, ESTP.
The types that prefer Ni over Si,
Te over Fe, Fi over Ti and Se over Ne are called the “Gamma quadra”: INTJ,
ENTJ, ISFP, ESFP.
The types that prefer Si over Ni,
Te over Fe, Fi over Ti and Ne over Se are called the “Delta quadra”: INFP,
ENFP, ISTJ, ESTJ.
!!Important note!!: While I defined the concept of opposite functions (Fi/Ti, Fe/Te, Ni/Si,
Ne/Se) as functions that have the same start point and opposite ending points,
thus canceling each other out; I
define the pair of functions Ti/Te, Fi/Fe, Ni/Ne and Si/Se as REVERSED FUNCTIONS, which would have
opposite starting points and same ending point. As a result, they won’t try to
battle on the same place in your cognition, but because of the different
starting points, they won’t be in harmony either. That said, you can use the
reversed functions at the same time but one is always chosen as the winner,
they won’t take full control of the user both at the same time, one being
chosen as the “main driver” while the other one working in the area that the
leading function of the two can’t cover. Reversed functions have the opposite
orientation (one is introverted and one is extroverted) so while one function
is your “start point” you can choose the other one starting somewhere else in
the external world (if your leading function between the two is introverted) or
in the internal world (if your leading function between the two is extroverted)
to try to reach your “end point” faster which is common between the two.
!!! VERY IMPORTANT !!!:
USING ONE OF THE FUNCTIONS MAKES YOUR REVERSED FUNCTION STRONGER, EVEN IF
YOU’RE NOT USING THE REVERSED FUNCTION AT ALL.
Now, let’s take a look at what I
said at the beginning of this article. You have a main function out of all 8
that you prefer, this is your “main state of being”, the function most attached
to your ego and personality. It is called the DOMINANT function. Now because to not be retarded, you need a
function that absorbs information and one that processes it. If your dominant
function is a judging one, it needs a perceiving function to absorb all the
information you need to process. If your dominant is a perceiving function, it
needs a judging information to make sense of all the absorbed information. That
is when your AUXILIARY function
comes into play, if your dominant function is a judging one, your auxiliary
will be a perceiving function, and if your dominant function is perceiving your
auxiliary function will be a judging function. Also, if your dominant is
introverted your auxiliary will be extroverted and vice-versa so we can have
access to both worlds.
Example: If your dominant function
is Introverted Thinking (Ti), your auxiliary will automatically be an
extroverted function (since Ti is introverted) and a perceiving function (since
Ti is judging). That would leave with Ti-Se (aka the ISTP personality type) or Ti-Ne (aka the INTP personality type, which is also the author of this article’s
type.)
Now, working with a dominant and
an auxiliary is like living with your head, your torso intact without arms and
legs. You can basically live, you can breathe, etc. but living is extremely
difficult. This is the case for your cognitive functions too. The dominant
function needs a function of the opposite attitude (introverted-extroverted)
and of the opposite of its axis (thinking-feeling for J functions or
sensing-intuition for P functions) to balance it out, creating overall harmony.
That would be called your INFERIOR
function, which if you develop as much as you can could bring you psychological
wholeness and harmony.
For example let’s take a Ti
dominant (IxTP types), if their inferior function was only extroverted but on
the same part of the axis (extroverted thinking: Te) it would be its reversed function which would cause a
lack of harmony since these functions are basically separate from each other,
each one is doing its job in its world (Ti in internal world and Te in external
world) but they have different starting points which would mean a function
takes over, that being Ti of course since its dominant and Te would just be a
tool for Ti to use in the external world.
If the inferior function was only
on the opposite end of the axis but not on
the opposite attitude, for Ti being Fi it would mean that the inferior would be
your opposite function which would
mean you can only use one at a time, which would mean they will fight for the
Ji spot in your stack, and most of the time Ti would since it’s the dominant
function, causing its feeling side to be constantly repressed, thus ignored.
At the same time, the auxiliary
also has its balancing function (which has the same rules of balance as the
dominant-inferior relationship) which is called the tertiary function. If your
auxiliary function was Ti, your tertiary would be Fe. If your dominant was Ti,
your inferior would be Fe. Ti and Fe balance each other out. Also Si and Ne, Ni
and Se and Fi and Te balance each other out.
Last but not least, let’s take a final and more in-depth look at each of
the “roles” the functions in your stack take:
-Your dominant function (your 1st function). This is the function
that you use every second of your life, your dominant one, the one you get a
grasp from the minute you were born, it's also your strongest and the most valued
by you. It’s your main “way of being”. I don’t have much to add here, other
than it is the true function you can call “ego” or “self”, looking at this
process you can truly say “THIS IS ME”.
The dominant function is:
->Accepting: Accepting
functions are used to make some sort of “view” of the world; focusing on obtaining a picture of reality and ultimately
understanding it.
->Mental/conscious: You are
conscious of the use of mental functions and can explain pretty well what you
are thinking/doing with it.
->Strong: Strong functions can
have a more sophisticated grasp on information, and can be used practically for
the benefit of oneself and others.
->Inert: Inert functions are
rather rigid, inflexible and resistant to changes from environment or self. Inert
functions do not integrate information from the environment; thus, the strength
of these functions remain the way they are. These functions are rather rigid in
their functioning; they are almost immune to internal changes. They require an
external impulse of sufficient strength so that something in them changes.
-Your auxiliary function (your 2nd function). This is the function
that supports the dominant, because the dominant simply can't work without
this. If the dominant is a judging (information-processing) function, it needs
a perceiving auxiliary to absorb the needed information to process. If the
dominant function is a perceiving one, it needs a judging auxiliary so it can
do something with all the information acquired, so you can actually make
decisions. Since this function is reached out to help the dominant, we feel
about it as a way to help ourselves and help others, having a fluffy loving
reaction when using it. It is what we produce but we never take from. This
is what we “give” to the world, not what we take from it. Compared to the
dominant function, this process is much more flexible. With the dominant
function, systems, procedures, experiences, models, etc. are made
automatically. With the auxiliary you can choose to make one or to not make
one.
The auxiliary function is:
->Producing: Producing
functions are used as a way to change the reality/environment, thus, they do
not merely reflect the reality, as accepting functions do, but generate an
altered, imagined picture of the world, which serves as a solution of their
tasks.
->Mental/conscious: You are
conscious of the use of mental functions and can explain pretty well what you
are thinking/doing with it.
->Strong: Strong functions can
have a more sophisticated grasp on information, and can be used practically for
the benefit of oneself and others.
->Contact: Contrary to the
rigid functioning of inert functions, contact functions are flexible and
non-resistant to change. They adapt and integrate new experiences from the
environment. These are capable of being improved over time (through ability or
simply new understandings).
-Your tertiary function (your 3rd function). This function balances
the auxiliary, so instead of absorbing all the information you need to make
important decisions (if you have a perceiving auxiliary), or re-processing the
other side of the equation (if you have a judging auxiliary) you can just
return you your tertiary function (3rd) and relax, yeah, it's mostly a relaxing
function. Its strength is not as important for use as the strength of your
inferior because the inferior balances your dominant which is more important
than balancing the auxiliary. It is generally something we're not very good at,
we're average but we don't really care anyway. While the auxiliary being
something you give to the world but not take from, the other side of it would
be what you take from but never give
back. It’s what you benefit from and what you need so you can work better
but you almost never produce it. We
feel about it like child, its use is almost childlike and pure, and people
often call it a “Relief”, “play” or “relaxing” function, since it’s what we
generally use to take a step back and have fun/relax/etc.
The tertiary function is:
-> Producing: Producing
functions are used as a way to change the reality/environment, thus, they do
not merely reflect the reality, as accepting functions do, but generate an
altered, imagined picture of the world, which serves as a solution of their
tasks.
->Vital/unconscious: Vital
functions tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing
things or inadvertently in the form of spontaneous sentiments, "gut
feelings", "I don't know, I just did it."
->Weak: Weak functions tend to
oversimplify data, do not usually generate conclusions on their own, and depend
on help from outside sources.
->Inert: Inert functions are
rather rigid, inflexible and resistant to changes from environment or self.
Inert functions do not integrate information from the environment; thus, the
strength of these functions remain the way they are. These functions are rather
rigid in their functioning; they are almost immune to internal changes. They
require an external impulse of sufficient strength so that something in them
changes.
-Your inferior function (your 4th function). This is the function
that balances your dominant function. This, positively, is used as a function
to aspire at, to make yourself a better person, most people have a love/hate
relationship with this function, (more hate in younger years, more love when
older and mature) they might find
people that use it extremely annoying but at the same time they kind of envy
them.
Negatively, it goes berserk under
stress, but of course in a negative way. Generally, this is sometimes called
“the shadow” of the ego (To not be confused with the four shadow functions!!),
be it the repressed aspect of your personality that hides all your
insecurities, traumas and biggest fears. Even with all the negative aspects of
it, it is the exact part of your psyche you need to work on, to face all your
fears and come to psychological wholeness.
The inferior function is:
->Accepting: Accepting
functions are used to make some sort of “view” of the world; focusing on obtaining a picture of reality and ultimately
understanding it.
->Vital/unconscious: Vital
functions tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing
things or inadvertently in the form of spontaneous sentiments, "gut
feelings", "I don't know, I just did it."
->Weak: Weak functions tend to
oversimplify data, do not usually generate conclusions on their own, and depend
on help from outside sources.
->Contact: Contrary to the
rigid functioning of inert functions, contact functions are flexible and non-resistant
to change. They adapt and integrate new experiences from the environment. These
are capable of being improved over time (through ability or simply new
understandings).
SHADOW FUNCTIONS: As much as the dominant function is the
only function that is truly attached to your ego and the one that you could
truly call “self”, the other 3 functions in your main stack are still part of
your self. Often when we think about
our shadow functions we think of them as an an impostor, “this is not myself”. Through
personal observation I found out that the order from 1 to 8 is not only by
preference, but, also by how much of the function we control.
I repeat, not how much we control them but how much of the function we control.
That said, we often struggle to control our four shadow functions, so often
when we engage in the process of the four shadow functions we might feel that they control ourselves. They are often
very negative, the source of negative experiences, how we lash out at others or
ourselves. Another negative aspect of it is that using one of the shadow
functions mean replacing one of our functions from the main stack, (the
opposite function), meaning that to use a function in your shadow stack
(actually for the function to use you) would mean that a function from your
main stack would have to be canceled/blocked which is not a very good thing,
disturbing your psychological peace.
-The Opposing/Ignoring function (your 5th function,
sometimes called the argumentative function): This function is the reverse of
your dominant and opposite of your inferior (cancels your inferior/4th
function).
This is rooted pretty deep in your
unconscious mind, as some sort of devil’s advocate in the back of your head
telling you everything you’re doing is wrong, however, we can turn this
critical part of it on and off, making it more or less an argumentative process
since we can choose when we are critical of both self and others with this
function. We engage in this function when we are argumentative and stubborn,
letting it work on the opposite orientation of your dominant to get to the
destination faster, which is the same for both the dominant and the opposing.
Due to the opposite starting point to your dominant, you will disagree with
everything you’re doing while doing it, but you are doing it with goal-oriented
purposes, like “doing the dirty work”. Someone has to do it, right? Also, being
the reversed of your dominant, this is the function that your are most likely
to rebel as so when you use this process (or when others use it) you are the
most likely to disagree with everything you/others are doing. Because it’s
so hated and seen as wrong in so many ways, the user will feel very resistant
to doing anything that involves in this function. The reverse also happens, the
user might engage in this process just to prove how bad it is.
Remember this cancels out your
inferior function (4th) and works in disharmony with the dominant
function (1st).
The opposing/ignoring function is:
->Accepting: Accepting
functions are used to make some sort of “view” of the world; focusing on obtaining a picture of reality and ultimately
understanding it.
->Vital/unconscious: Vital functions tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing things or inadvertently in the form of spontaneous sentiments, "gut feelings", "I don't know, I just did it."
->Strong: Strong functions can have a more sophisticated grasp on information, and can be used practically for the benefit of oneself and others.
->Vital/unconscious: Vital functions tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing things or inadvertently in the form of spontaneous sentiments, "gut feelings", "I don't know, I just did it."
->Strong: Strong functions can have a more sophisticated grasp on information, and can be used practically for the benefit of oneself and others.
>Inert: Inert functions are
rather rigid, inflexible and resistant to changes from environment or self.
Inert functions do not integrate information from the environment; thus, the
strength of these functions remain the way they are. These functions are rather
rigid in their functioning; they are almost immune to internal changes. They
require an external impulse of sufficient strength so that something in them
changes.
-The Demonstrative function (your 6th function, also
called the critical parent, witch or senex): This function is the reversed of
your auxiliary and the opposite of your tertiary. This is more like an
unappreciated/unvalued hidden talent of yours, a thing you are pretty good at
(one of your strongest functions, even better than the 5th even though your 1st
is stronger than your 2nd but the reason why it is so strong is pretty
complicated so I won't explain it now), but you are pretty indifferent to it
most of the time. You don't hate it like the 5th one, we often don’t think that everything you/others
are doing is wrong (like the 5th function) but you think of it like
"Ok... Why would I do this? I mean I can... But I have no reason to do
it.". You find it pretty useless and pointless, even though you are
amazing at using it.
At the same time, it works
unconsciously feeding the auxiliary without letting the user know. In fact, out
of all the 8 functions, this one is the most rooted in the unconscious mind.
For example, let’s take an IxTJ (auxiliary= Te, demonstrative function=Ti),
they will use the external simpler logic Te systems because they find using Ti
over-complex and unnecessary, they will use Te to make things simple and
efficient but they are not aware that in their mind, deep into the subconscious,
their brain is creating Ti systems as they move through life. They don’t want
to use them, finding them immature and over-complicated, actually they won’t
even realize they’re there, but they might do without realizing when alone or
in certain situations where Te isn’t enough.
As a result, similarly to the 5th
function, this function is some sort of critical voice in your head telling
that everything you/others are doing is wrong, HOWEVER, this can not be turned
on/off like the 5th function so it is always working in the back of
your head. It is also more unconscious than the 5th function, so the
so called “voice” might not be as “loud”, but, trust me: It IS there. Think of
the IxTJ example I gave. The Ti is in the back of your heads telling the user
that all of the Te systems they’re using are wrong. Or think of an IxFJ
(auxiliary Fe, demonstrative Fi). The auxiliary Fe of the IxFJ is likely to
serve the needs of others and follow objective common agreements in society of
values, but the demonstrative Fi in the back of the IxFJs head always tells
them “Why don’t you make up your own values? Why don’t you stand up for your
own values? Why do you always have to serve the needs of others, why can’t you
serve the needs of yourself?”. The 5th function is a very similar
process, however, is a little more conscious (so that “voice” is better heard,
it’s louder), and it’s also more
controlled. The 6th function screams constantly, the 5th
screams sometimes.
Remember this cancels out your
tertiary (3rd) function and works in disharmony with the auxiliary
function (2nd).
The demonstrative function is:
->Producing: Producing
functions are used as a way to change the reality/environment, thus, they do
not merely reflect the reality, as accepting functions do, but generate an
altered, imagined picture of the world, which serves as a solution of their
tasks.
->Vital/unconscious: Vital functions tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing things or inadvertently in the form of spontaneous sentiments, "gut feelings", "I don't know, I just did it."
->Strong: Strong functions can have a more sophisticated grasp on information, and can be used practically for the benefit of oneself and others.
->Contact: Contrary to the rigid functioning of inert functions, contact functions are flexible and non-resistant to change. They adapt and integrate new experiences from the environment. These are capable of being improved over time (through ability or simply new understandings).
->Vital/unconscious: Vital functions tend to manifest themselves without words in the process of doing things or inadvertently in the form of spontaneous sentiments, "gut feelings", "I don't know, I just did it."
->Strong: Strong functions can have a more sophisticated grasp on information, and can be used practically for the benefit of oneself and others.
->Contact: Contrary to the rigid functioning of inert functions, contact functions are flexible and non-resistant to change. They adapt and integrate new experiences from the environment. These are capable of being improved over time (through ability or simply new understandings).
-The PoLR function (short for Point Of Least Resistance, 7th
function, also called the trickster, the deceiving role or the vulnerable
function): This function is the reversed of your tertiary and the opposite of
your auxiliary. This function is much more conscious than the 3rd, 4th,
5th and 6th and when we use it we are often very aware of
it. This is not extremely despised as the 5th function, you don’t rebel against
it that much but let me tell you one thing, YOU SUCK AT USING IT. This is your
point of least resistance, your weakest function. We might hate people that use
our 5th function, we don't really hate people that use our 7th but we hate using
it. We really suck at it. The reason your 7th is weaker than your 8th (even
though your 3rd is stronger than your 4th) is that , as you know the better a
function is the better your reversed function is, so we put much more pressure
onto our 4th function than our 3rd so the 8th is much more pressured than the
7th. Archetypically, this is the “trickster” or the “bad child”, we might use
it for rebellious or “evil” purposes. It has been observed that children will
often use this function recklessly when having very critical parents. Generally
this function can also be “Deceiving”
making us believe that something it is important for us to work on when in fact
it isn’t because it’s as weak as the inferior (even a little weaker) which
would make it look like it’s something we need to work on because it sometimes
feels like our “lacking” spot but in fact we shouldn’t try working on it like
all because every time we use this function we are only destructive of self and
others. Everything we do using this process is confusing, “weird” and will
cause feelings of ambivalence. This is also the process we use to solve
problems, to get out of negative situations. Where everything goes wrong we go
to this function to “sort things out”. And by that I mean ego disintegration. It
causes you to see yourself and others in a false light and it distorts your
experiences so that you misunderstand them and react to others in an overly
critical or defensive way. Defensive
is the key word there. For example, An INFJ may project their poor Extraverted
Thinking abilities (PoLR Te) onto another person who is effectively using
Extraverted Thinking. For example, an ESTJ (who uses dominant Te) may try to
organize or delegate to the INFJ in some way. They are very proficient at this,
but the INFJ may naturally bristle at this strong display of Te. They may
think, “You’re trying to control me! You are such a power hungry animal! I will
not let you do this so I will try to exert my control over my own life and
system back to you!”. Remember that this function is the reversed of your 3rd
function (works in disharmony with it) and the opposite of your 2nd
function (cancels it out).
The PoLR function is:
The PoLR function is:
->Producing: Producing
functions are used as a way to change the reality/environment, thus, they do
not merely reflect the reality, as accepting functions do, but generate an
altered, imagined picture of the world, which serves as a solution of their
tasks.
->Mental/conscious: You are conscious of the use of mental functions and can explain pretty well what you are thinking/doing with it.
->Weak: Weak functions tend to oversimplify data, do not usually generate conclusions on their own, and depend on help from outside sources.
->Mental/conscious: You are conscious of the use of mental functions and can explain pretty well what you are thinking/doing with it.
->Weak: Weak functions tend to oversimplify data, do not usually generate conclusions on their own, and depend on help from outside sources.
-> Inert: Inert functions are
rather rigid, inflexible and resistant to changes from environment or self.
Inert functions do not integrate information from the environment; thus, the
strength of these functions remain the way they are. These functions are rather
rigid in their functioning; they are almost immune to internal changes. They
require an external impulse of sufficient strength so that something in them
changes.
-The Role function (your 8th function, sometimes also
called the Devilish or the Demonic/Daemonic): This one is the opposite of your
first one, it's the same type of function so they're similar in some ways, but
at the same time you can't use both of them because it's the opposite (to not
be confused with reversed!). We don't suck at it like we do with the 7th, we
are ~kinda good at it, but we use it only when our inferior is challenged. Your
8th function will always be better than the inferior because its our OWN way of
doing the inferior, but we prefer using the inferior because we don't have to
turn off our dominant when we use our inferior, when we use our 8th function we
have to unfortunately... ('cause it's the OPPOSITE (not reversed) of our
dominant). As I said, we use it when our inferior is attacked and we are not
confident enough to use our inferior so that's pretty much its role, to save
the inferior. Otherwise it might have some "triggers" and we can
engage in it (and shutting down our dominant of course) and we might have big
plans with this function, life-time possibilities but we end up disappointed
'cause it only lasts like 15 minutes.
Basically, for most people ideally
would be to not use neither the inferior (aka what society expects of you and
it's annoying you but unfortunately you kind of have to do it) or the role (aka
basically cheating the inferior and taking the "short route" to it),
and in their "natural habitat" they would love to have both of them
off but most of the times they will resort to the short route, aka the role.
(because people are lazy). Now, some people
call it the "Demonic/Devilish" function., saying it's a function that
is rooted deep in the unconscious and is destructive of ourselves and others,
there lays our biggest fears and insecurities and that it's one of the most
negative functions. What is the true answer? Let me explain We never have FULL
access to our 8th function, it is very conscious but not as conscious as the
dominant and auxiliary. When we use it, you don't use 100% of it like you do
with your dominant. An INTJ using Si wouldn't be exactly like an ISTJ because
they only use like 75% of Si. (This was a quite random number, take it for
granted). WHY??? Because, after all, it's the short route to our problems so we
only use THE NECESSARY MINIMUM OF IT. As minimal as possible until the user
gets out of the problem that is challenging their inferior. An INTP/ISTP
meeting new people will only check their own personal values (role Fi) of the
situation they are in and pretty much the most basic values(Fe), an INFJ/INTJ
using his role Si would only focus on how the environment around them is
affecting themselves (Si) on the present moment (Se) and not focus much about
how it was in the past, etc.
Now, because we only use about X%
of our function, the rest of it I believe goes to the unconscious part. 75%
(for example) is the conscious minimal part that we use to get out of the bad
situation we're in while the rest of 25% is how the situation actually bothered
us, as I explained before why, it is repressed in the unconscious (I don't have
time to use all of the function, using as minimal as possible), where all of
our deep hidden insecurities and terrors of life stay hidden. That's why some
people call it "devilish" or "demonic/daemonic" and they
say that is the most unconscious function. An INxJ (Ni dominant) usually
focuses on the future, and if using Si they will focus on how the present
situation affects them sensorically (hunger, pain, thirst, etc.) and not on the
past. The past sensorical experiances are rooted deep in the unconscious, and
they will be negative because we are enagaging in our 8th function usually when
we are in a negative situation (when our inferior function is challanged).
Some schools of thought put a big
accent on this function, urging everyone to try to develop their role function
as much as possible, but I PERSONALLY believe it’s not
the best thing you can do honestly. I think you shouldn't focus on developing
any of the four shadow funcitons because by using a shadow function you have to
cancel one of the functions from your main stack, so it will be very limiting
and losing your freedom. That is an argument, although, it is not the main
reason I don't agree with developing your 8th function. Other than it cancels
your dominant (so you have to choose between one of them), the 8th function is
basically something you use when your inferior is challenged. The ideal of a
young INTP who has weak Fe would be to have no values at all, BUT, when he
finds himself in a place where he has to use some values he will turn to Fi.
"My ideal situation would be to have no values at all but if I have to I
will choose personal ones since I suck at knowing objective ones". It is
good to have a decent development of your role/8th function at earlier ages,
but it all has to stop somewhere because what you truly need to develop to
balance your dominant is your inferior. Your role doesn't balance anything, it
actually cancels your dominant which limits A TON of your freedom. Imagine
riding a bike being your inferior and role functions. Using training wheels
would be using your role function while riding without training wheels is using
your inferior. A young person might not want to ride "a bike" at all
(metaphorically speaking), but if he had to he would use training wheels (8th
function). It would be good for him to have a decent skill of riding with
training wheels but at a point in his life he HAS TO learn riding without them
(using his inferior/4th function). Like I said before, using the 8th
function is only the short route, and it also hides deep fears and insecurities
deep in our unconscious the longer we use it which is not something very good…
We also have to remember that all
the traumatic experiences that would have happened if we used the inferior were
repressed into the unconscious mind by using the 8th function. In my
opinion, using the role function is exactly like running away from your fears
in circles. You have to face your fears at one point (using your inferior
function).
In conclusion, developing your
role/8th/demonic function is alright (especially at a young age because your
inferior will be VERY WEAK at early ages), but focus on your inferior. Your
inferior function is the one that balances your dominant function, thus, bringing
psychological wholeness. I repeat, this was personal opinion and different
schools of taught say different things. Socionics urges everyone to develop
their role function. MBTI theory doesn’t even agree with the shadow functions
doing anything, they think that they’re almost inexistent. Jung doesn’t even
focus on the functions.
The Role function is:
->Accepting: Accepting
functions are used to make some sort of “view” of the world; focusing on obtaining a picture of reality and ultimately
understanding it.
->Mental/conscious: You are conscious of the use of mental functions and can explain pretty well what you are thinking/doing with it.
->Weak: Weak functions tend to oversimplify data, do not usually generate conclusions on their own, and depend on help from outside sources.
->Contact: Contrary to the rigid functioning of inert functions, contact functions are flexible and non-resistant to change. They adapt and integrate new experiences from the environment. These are capable of being improved over time (through ability or simply new understandings).
->Mental/conscious: You are conscious of the use of mental functions and can explain pretty well what you are thinking/doing with it.
->Weak: Weak functions tend to oversimplify data, do not usually generate conclusions on their own, and depend on help from outside sources.
->Contact: Contrary to the rigid functioning of inert functions, contact functions are flexible and non-resistant to change. They adapt and integrate new experiences from the environment. These are capable of being improved over time (through ability or simply new understandings).
!Note about Ni or Ne being in the demonstrative spot!:
When you have an iNtuitive function as demonstrative, these functions are
already half-unconscious so as a result of the 6th spot being the most
unconscious, the process of them becomes FULLY unconscious, so for example
while an xNxJ isn't aware of the patterns but is aware of the symbolism behind
them, an INxP (demonstrative Ni) isn't aware of neither the patterns or the
symbolism/metaphors/comparisons/visions/insights/etc.
Same for ENxJs (demonstrative Ne), while some post-processed information
comes to Ne users (for example an xNTPs random idea of how an asteroid is gonna
hit the earth isn't going to panic him ‘cause it comes to him post-processed by
Ti), the ENTJ and ENFJ don't even have access to the crazy ideas, they are just
sitting there behind of their mind.
Also, I desperately feel the need to include this thing I found on reddit.
We often use our PoLR function for problem solving “what we do to get out of
situations where everything is wrong” and we know that it cancels out with the
auxiliary functions (they repress each other) so the opposite of getting out of
negative situations is the auxiliary, the one we use for creative
self-expression “what we give to the world”. It is also found in tertiary and
demonstrative (Another pack of 2 functions that cancel each other), the
tertiary is basic life needs while the demonstrative represents deep
subconscious desires. Let me just leave you with the quote:
“The role of the PoLR function in problem solving is often overlooked. I've
seen it called "the second auxiliary function" a few time but most
description focus on the PoLR aspect which would more correctly be applied to
the Tertiary as Reinin correctly observes.
The Demonstrative and the Tertiary are conflicting wants while the
Auxilairy and the PoLR are conflicting approaches to problem solving. For wants
we have basic needs (Tertiary) vs ambitions (Demonstrative) while for solutions
we have confidence (the Auxilary) vs self-sacrifice (the Vulnerable).
People are fine with producing with their vulnerable function for minimal
appreciation while any production coming from the valued attitude of the
Tertiary is done with the expectation of recognition and being rewarded. Lack
of gratitude or acknowledgement of this are is almost guaranteed to bring about
painful feelings of insecurity and persecution.”
Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/JungianTypology/comments/5l7x58/reinins_model_of_socionics_plus_a_link_to_one_of/?st=j4nyjndz&sh=97f3b065
Comentarii
Trimiteți un comentariu