Hierarchy is not a Sliding Scale

[Auburn]

A (...quite crappy) chart for how the hierarchies work~!

Spoiler

There are four oscillation pairs in each type.

1. Primary Axis Oscillation (large blue wheel)
2. Secondary Axis Oscillation (small blue wheel)
3. Primary Mode Oscillation (top white wheel)
4. Secondary Mode Oscillation (bottom white wheel)

The #1 is the native identity of the individual.
The #2 is the supportive processes to the native.
The #3 is the individual's native and easiest mode-of-operandi.
The #4 is the individual's less native and hardest mode of operandi.

Types generally specialize in a certain oscillation. A good portion of people use #3 as their default - and that is what the MBTI profiles are based on. Others use #1 most, and these people know themselves the most -- their dark as well as light side -- and have an integrated identity. Others use #2 more than others, even #1, and there is a peculiar sense about them as though they're trying harder than they should to be something they can't really fully portray even with their extra effort. And then there are those who use #4 most, and these have a chronically draining symptom that makes them lose momentum/energy, not really know or identify with their true selves, but nor are they necessarily faking.

This is why the conventional view of the 4 functions being a sliding-scale of
importance in the psyche is utterly flawed. They don't operate in isolation, and magnitude of expression doesn't equate with dominance on the 'scale'. What causes a process to appear more expressive can be due to many reasons.

If the wheel #2 is spinning faster than #1, it still won't overpower it. Instead it'll appear as though it is swelling up inside of the confines of the #1, like a child in the tummy of a pregnant woman. Or if #1 is spinning really fast one may not be able to tell which process is the dominant or polar, because both will be used so strongly and in tandem.

...er... this probably won't make sense to anyone. >.<
{contemplates deleting senseless post}

EDIT: post readded 0:

 

[redbaron]

Way to change the entire post on me Auburn

It made sense to me. Actually expressed something I've been trying to wrap my head around, but couldn't find the words.

 

[Fukyo]

What happened?

 

[loveofreason]

It made sense Auburn. I found it really constructive in relating to my own observations and experiences, and would have hoped the post remained to be built upon and contributed to by others.

All this compulsive perfectionism might just deny someone a few insights and the opportunity to contribute

 

[Auburn]

D: sowwy..!!

...encouragement. My Fe ish happy...
(gosh I'm so fickle)


Anyhow! ...er...

From my experience observing people in different "grips" and states, the most optimal mode of operation is one in which #1 and #2 are spinning with momentum moreso within themselves than with one-another.

For example, when a person is allowed to oscillate between Te and Fi extensively -- then they reach a more perfect conclusion/judgment about both domains. This is because Fi will error-check Te's insensitivity and Te will error-check Fi's impracticality. The same applies to Fe and Ti.

In contrast, if Ti is spinning almost exclusively with Ne, then neither of these two processes is getting the other half of the story -- from Si or Fe -- and thus their conclusions will lack the full elements needed to be both keenly insightful (dual-perception (N/S) use) or admirably discerning (dual-judgment (T/F)).

There still has to be a way for each of the blue wheels to 'hand-over' information to the other though, and this is done through the white wheels, respectively.

But the blue wheels should be spinning most on their own, perfecting their area of expertise from both angles - producing a refined product to hand over to each-other.

This, I believe, is a key to mastery of one's psyche.
Someone who I believe uses their psyche in this manner is Richard Dawkins. Whose keen Te-Fi discernment wheel often fools people into thinking it is Ti due to the precision it has. But he also has exceptional views on the ethos and amorality of delusion and lies. Combined with a simultaneously historically sound (Si) and imaginatively open (Ne) perception of reality that is optimistic about all that is unknown, insomuch as it doesn't contradict with the known to such a degree that there is little reason to be optimistic about the small margin of unknown.

If the Ne/Si or Se/Ni wheel can deliver wholistic data to either the Te/Fi or Fe/Ti wheel --- then keener judgments can be made. Even being too heavy on the #1 wheel can be detrimental : a perfect ratio of data intake and discrimination is also needed... *ponders*

p.s. -- It's visually possible to identify how a person's using these oscillations but that's a different matter.

 

[loveofreason]

@loveofreason
mm, I'm not so sure that this sort of perfectionism is compulsive. It has a very direct thought process behind it. Being Ti dominant, INTPs can't help but perfect things, but there is always a reason behind the perfection. There has to be some kind of logic for any action (even if it is based on Ne paranoia >.>)

If it can't be controlled it's compulsive

(Glad for return of OP)

 

[Auburn]

Ummms...
A few more.. slightly esoteric.. thoughts..

People who don't oscillate using the 'blue' wheels, but the 'white' wheels exclusively, have a divided psyche. The two will be spinning largely disconnected from one another. So half of their conscious functions are being repressed/ignored and this division causes a light/dark contrast in the psyche.

But when a person is acquainted with both sides of their psyche this contrast minimizes and one is able to understand all aspects of humanity [since all of them are represented in their 4 functions]. It's hard to dislike anyone after that, as one sees elements of others in oneself ---- and the challenge of dissipating the disharmony between any two+ humans becomes marginally different from understanding how to resolve the problems within one's own mind. The conflicting views people show outwardly are expressions of the antagonistic nature of any one single mind.

One being will simply be the imbalanced manifestation of one extreme of an equation/algorithm (the human consciousness) and another imbalanced being will represent the other. And the battle, which could have been had and resolved in the mind of the individuals, is taken into the world. Humanity is the macro-expression of any one human's psychodrama.

More rambles on use of oscillations:

Someone like an NeTi will "spin their wheels" between theory and abstract analysis of that theory. There's lots of these. Never truly anchoring to Si and dismissing erroneous hypotheses but instead filtering them only via Ti which may see no theoretical flaw within the presented parameters. Or the TeSi like Bill O'Reily, who simply spins between Te & Si, discarding any hypotheses that doesn't fit prior data, and bulldozing insensitively and crudely through people with Te. etc.

I postulate that Jung was able to see the functions as clearly as he did because his patients were neurotic and over-relying on one end of an oscillation. It also makes sense why Jung based his theory on the lower functions being antagonistic to the dominant. And MBTI copied this element of Jung's work, and continued to call the 3rd and 4th function malignant in some ways and depreciated their value.

@PhoenixRising & @loveofreason - sillies!

 

[EyeSeeCold]

I like your model of the functions, since it stresses that the pairs work in tandem. With emphasis on Rationality/Irrationality(Jx or Px dominant), I personally think the Dom-Inferior pair is more stable whereas the Auxiliary-Tertiary pair fluctuates in instability, this having implications psychologically, behaviorally, emotionally and with respect to energy levels.



Though, the issue with function hierarchy is more than just how function configuration or typology is understood. If typology is real then there must be some form of function measurement, and the brain doesn't work in percentages like tests would imply. The qualities (as well as the quantities) of function configurations must be considered.

The current mode of function ordering is by the relative amount of expression between dominant and non-dominant functions. But there are questions of function quality such as:

Does function dominance entail more dimensions of understanding and perception than function inferiority?

Does a dominant function perceive things that an auxiliary function doesn't (and vice-versa)?

Which functions are conscious and which aren't? Are all functions conscious?

Are there symptoms or features (cognitive, psychological, or behavioral) specific to the various function configurations?


Other questions of quantity:
Are certain functions valued more than others, in a configuration?
Is there relative strength of control in function aspects between types?


P.S.
I use the term "oscillation" to refer to functions and their role in subtypes / type switching(e.g. TiNeSiFe to TiSiNeFe, basically becoming similar to TeSi and TiSe). But that's a whole different topic...

 

[loveofreason]

Humanity is the macro-expression of any one human's psychodrama.

Long considered this true. Be interesting to have a cognitive explanation of why it may be so - something it looks this investigation may provide.

I postulate that Jung was able to see the functions as clearly as he did because his patients were neurotic and over-relying on one end of an oscillation. It also makes sense why Jung based his theory on the lower functions being antagonistic to the dominant. And MBTI copied this element of Jung's work, and continued to call the 3rd and 4th function malignant in some ways and depreciated their value.

That makes alot of sense actually, in explaining why such 2-dimensional profiles as the MBTI generates have such a patchy appeal to people. It seems there are those closer to pathology/imbalance or simply immature, who find a single profile perfectly fitting, whereas others with more integrated or complex usage don't seem to 'fit' quite anywhere.

Personally, I haven't found the 3rd and 4th functions to be the terrible things MBTI makes them out to be. I've found the 'inferior' to be an essential pathway to health.

I like how the explanation of oscillations identifies exactly where and how a particular configuration can come across as another - I'm thinking of the many faces of INFJ thread in particular. It might be easiest to see instances in which this type manifests like others, but then it's not a unique abberation of INFJ. All types can be just as multifaceted in their manifestation.

Not quite sure about the consistency of terminology though - describing something as both a wheel and/or cycle; as oscillating... then also as an axis, is kind of contradictory. I find it easier to understand things in terms of cycles, so I prefer that. Not sure what reflects reality best... nor am I sure what an 'axis' really implies about the momentum and direction of cognitive flow/exchange.

eep.. imo the entire concept of conscious "control" is so false in reality. all thoughts are a causal cascade, so in that sense everything would be compulsive.

the dictionary definition of "compulsive" is this: Resulting from or relating to an irresistible urge, esp. one that is against one's conscious wishes: "compulsive eating".

that is the definition i had in mind when referencing the behavior of INTPs, we don't usually do things based on an emotional urge unless there is also a logical backing to the emotion.

Nice illustration :smiley_emoticons_mr

Dun kill teh lulz! *wails* Dun killem!

 

[Obsidian]

Bump.

How do you tell the difference between an ENTP who cycles between the 2nd and 3rd functions, and an INTP who cycles between the 1st and 4th?

 

[cheese]

I love this thread. Yes yes yes to most points. Not sure on a couple.

But when a person is acquainted with both sides of their psyche this contrast minimizes and one is able to understand all aspects of humanity [since all of them are represented in their 4 functions]. It's hard to dislike anyone after that, as one sees elements of others in oneself ---- and the challenge of dissipating the disharmony between any two+ humans becomes marginally different from understanding how to resolve the problems within one's own mind. The conflicting views people show outwardly are expressions of the antagonistic nature of any one single mind.

One being will simply be the imbalanced manifestation of one extreme of an equation/algorithm (the human consciousness) and another imbalanced being will represent the other. And the battle, which could have been had and resolved in the mind of the individuals, is taken into the world. Humanity is the macro-expression of any one human's psychodrama.

Yes. Though I wonder if this is always a sign of maturity. I think it may sometimes simply be the result of an overly-associative (paranoid-type) mind. Usually high N types.

 

[Ink]

Are P-leads vastly better at perceiving things since that's their strength or because it's where they spend the most time? Is me asking this question an indicator I use the top white wheel too much? How does Ti-Si loops fit into this?

 

[Obsidian]

Ti-Se loop would mean you don't use either blue wheel. You use both white wheels, and you use them both in an unbalanced way.

 

[Ink]

I'm not talking about a Ti-Se loop

 

[Auburn]

Are P-leads vastly better at perceiving things since that's their strength or because it's where they spend the most time?

P-Leads are most predisposed to see associations between things. But it has to be kept in mind that the "perception" processes are irrational processes, in that they're not deductive/discriminating.

So P-Leads may have more of a sense of how things relate, and less of a sense of the limits, and where/when/how things don't logically relate. It takes the judgment functions to catch the fallacy when "correlation doesn't equate causation", whereas perception processes alone would only see correlation and take that as causation.

So it's arguable whether they have "better perception" in the sense of more accurately being able to discern reality. J-leads spend more energy in making sure the data they have is organized properly, while P-leads take in more data (which may give them better insight via broader scope than J-leads who have less of it, albeit better organized but missing holes).

Yet nobody has just perception or judgment processes, and a certain percentile in each disfavors their own dominant process anyhow. It's really based on the individual.

Is me asking this question an indicator I use the top white wheel too much? How does Ti-Si loops fit into this?

Firstly I don't suspect you use Ti (or are TiNe). =P
I'd speculate you use Te+Si a lot, based on text (which isn't too reliable tho)

The "Dom-Tert" Loop meme that has spread in the typology community is, imo, largely a tool for mistyped people to justify their irregularities.

It does exist, though, but present understanding is strongly misleading. From what I can gather, what happens in this is:

The #1 oscillation is not spinning. A person remains fixed on their dominant process without spinning to their polar process. Say for example an NiFe who doesn't use Se enough. The strong tendency for inaction (i) then stops the inner oscillation (Fe) as well. At least externally. It'll still be active in the psyche.

NiFe who are heavily using Ni-Ti will always actually be using Fe alongside their Ti. They don't use "just" Ti. This is why even though they may test as "INTP" and seem incredibly "T", all their stances will be of a sort that always revolves around, and be tinged by, the relations others have to others. They value the principles of Ti, more than those of Fe.

Even a lot of Fe-leads are academics because they come to value their Ti's principles more than Fe principles.

The judgment processes decide what axioms/principles to value, and sometimes an individual can value the principles of a process that is polar/sub-polar more. Most value them less. Ideally I'd hope they'd value both sides of their pairing -- it can go either of those 3 ways.

It really can be as simple as having the right conversation or thought, to shift them to value a different aspect of themselves more. Then they end up anchoring their sense of self to that part -- because the self is produced via brain activity and associations in the first place.

__
​

This all stems into a fascinating yet complex realm of how the sense of self relates to cognitive type. Multiple selves. Multiple concepts of "me" can emerge which, depending on the person, can be completely ignored, suppressed, or integrated.

This is admittedly where my knowledge starts to become limited. I know how the psyches of some types develop their identities but it can be very twisted. Blind-sided to parts of themselves.

 

[Ink]

Thank you for answering. So you don't agree with that you shouldn't directly use your inferior function but rather go at it indirectly? The opposite being what many do in their youth causing an inferiority complex?

And you are right typing by text isn't very accurate, I am a Ti-Ne user no doubt. (please go ahead and tell me why I'm not)

 

[scorpiomover]

I'm really glad you noticed that, Auburn. Put it over, much better than I could.

That graphic ability is really cool. Really demonstrates it well.

If I might add a few points:

1) The dom is the Alpha-boss function of the conscious (Drawn with a big circle around it). The aux helps the dom, and so acts as the subservient Beta-employee of the dom, and as if it was working inside the dom, as part of it (Drawn with a small circle, inside the dom circle).

2) The unconscious functions are complementary. So the inferior is the Alpha-boss function of the conscious (Drawn with a big circle around it). The tertiary helps the inferior, and so is the Beta of the unconscious. It works inside the inferior (Drawn with a small circle, inside the dom circle)..

3) The dom and the inferior both want to be the Alpha. If they collide, each tries to be the dominant Alpha-boss. So they'll never agree. They communicate, via their Betas, the aux and the ter, who are both subservient, and so lack the desire to dominate each other. (Links between the conscious and unconscious functions go as lines between the aux and the ter).

4) Scientific studies found that the subconscious is many times bigger than the conscious. At the same time, the conscious is clearly visible (as if it was in bright bold), while the subconscious is almost invisible (as if it was greyed out).

I have more to come on the cycles. But I'm working out how to describe it accurately.

 

[Obsidian]

I'm not talking about a Ti-Se loop

Bah, you know what I meant

 

[Obsidian]

@Auburn, you never answered me:

How do you tell the difference between an ENTP who cycles between the 2nd and 3rd functions, and an INTP who cycles between the 1st and 4th?

 

[Auburn]

(visually or psychologically?)
There's no way I could answer that question in the amount of time I have. o_o I also don't know all there is to know about this, but briefly..

Spoiler

Psychologically...

The two can produce the same ideas/thoughts/conclusions. You won't be able to tell the difference without a lot of experience and knowledge of several people of both types, I think.

Visually...

A TiNe who cycles beween their 2nd-3rd (Ne/Si) would be harder to tell apart from a NeTi who cycles between their 2nd-3rd (Ti/Fe). But your question's about a TiNe who cycles between Ti-Fe, which is easier.

When a TiNe is strongly cycling hir Ti-Fe, they'll appear more similar to FeSi. They will have rigid bodies, intense momentum halts as well as Fe-pushes. I suppose you'd see it as more "political" and even perhaps motherly. They'll have a fixation on principles to account for all matters of understanding. New data it organized within the frame of their existing algorithm of logic/ethics.

When an NeTi is strongly cycling hir Ti-Fe, they'll appear more similar to a hyped up SiFe. They'll have excited bodies which jitter with the momentum of Fe and roll-forward with it being channeled through their Ne. TiNe don't need to channel Fe through Ne, because Fe is already on the outer wheel. But NeTi expression of Fe is done in the confines of Ne/Si which gives it a more eccentric and playful energy.

Lawrence Krauss is an example of an Ne/Si lead oscillation, with Ti/Fe oscillation trying to push through but ends up picking up some Ne buoyancy along the way. But perhaps the clearest signal to differentiate them would be...

Ne(TiFe)Si - Native: Ne Continual Bubbling/Restless Excitation
Ti(NeSi)Fe - Native: Ti Complete Neutralization/Inaction

But none of this will make much sense, I bet. <.<
Text is such a poor channel to describe something as dimensional as the human psyche and/or body.

 

[Obsidian]

The point I was getting at was that if an ENTP focuses on Ti and Fe, effectively that seems no different than just an INTP.

Especially since I have always had trouble figuring out for sure which type I am, I was curious. So an ENTP who focuses on the judgment functions will continuously be bubbling and restless. An INTP who focuses on perception will be inactive. What you are saying is that the dominant function controls, regardless of whether someone focuses on their 2nd and 3rd functions. I don't see how bubbling and restless is any different from just a standard ENTP.

Having watched Lawrence Krauss for a full ten seconds, I can safely say he looks like a stereotypical nerdy ENTP.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

Auburn, you never answered me:

How do you tell the difference between an ENTP who cycles between the 2nd and 3rd functions, and an INTP who cycles between the 1st and 4th?

The point I was getting at was that if an ENTP focuses on Ti and Fe, effectively that seems no different than just an INTP.

Why would it seem no different? Is Ne the same thing regardless of whether it's dominant or secondary? What about Ti? Shouldn't there be a qualitative difference?


I think these questions are in the direction of what should be asked to improve current (MBTI) typology:

Does function dominance entail more dimensions of understanding and perception than function inferiority?

Does a dominant function perceive things that an auxiliary function doesn't (and vice-versa)?

Are there symptoms or features specific to the various function configurations(e.g. Ne as dom vs aux, Ti as dom vs aux)?