How did you become an INTP

[YOLOisonlyprinciple]

I Deleted It nvm

 

[Sinny91]

Dunno what your OP said, but I think I was born this way.
I have a feeling that I may have been an INFP, but external factors caused me to develope my Ti and squash my Fe.

I've been browsing typology forums for the last few days, and have seen a lot of people talking about how their type has changed.. Some changes so dramatic, I'm not sure who these people are trying to convince lolol.

 

[Inquisitor]

Dunno what your OP said, but I think I was born this way.
I have a feeling that I may have been an INFP, but external factors caused me to develope my Ti and squash my Fe.

I've been browsing typology forums for the last few days, and have seen a lot of people talking about how their type has changed.. Some changes so dramatic, I'm not sure who these people are trying to convince lolol.

Type never changes. It's hardwired; the structure and neuronal connections of your brain dictates your type. No way to alter that. You are born with it. Personality can and does vary greatly. An INTP may behave like an F type and an INFP may behave like a T type, but one will never become the other. When people say their type changes, what they really mean is that A) their perception of what their type is has changed or B) they notice changes in their values/personality/behavior, etc. Accurate understanding of typology requires many years of study and real-world observation. Even though I've been thinking about this stuff for many years on and off, I still consider myself to be a beginner.

 

[Jennywocky]

One reason I consider it to be 'wiring' is that even if we are shaped by experiences, the way we respond to the experiences initially is still shaped by wiring. You get two babies, for example, and their preexisting dispositions will determine how they respond to the same events. So often "nurture" actually is just making preference more extreme, although as we get older and have more conscious volition, we can choose to go against preference based on a variety of factors... with a complexity rivaling chaos theory, I suppose where small deviations in each situation can result in potentially different decisions.

The main thing with claiming a "wiring" issue is that we can't specify what the wiring is to predict temperament at this time, in general. It's like the "gay gene" thing (we are unable to really isolate such a thing) but even more complicated, we can't seem to break it down into triggering components as far as I know; we're always approaching it after the fact, analyzing behavior.

 

[Ex-User (11125)]

Type never changes. It's hardwired; the structure and neuronal connections of your brain dictates your type. No way to alter that. You are born with it. Personality can and does vary greatly. An INTP may behave like an F type and an INFP may behave like a T type, but one will never become the other. When people say their type changes, what they really mean is that A) their perception of what their type is has changed or B) they notice changes in their values/personality/behavior, etc. Accurate understanding of typology requires many years of study and real-world observation. Even though I've been thinking about this stuff for many years on and off, I still consider myself to be a beginner.

What about childhood? a lot of people did not start to consistently manifest whatever personality traits they have as adults until late adolescence

I've been browsing typology forums for the last few days, and have seen a lot of people talking about how their type has changed.. Some changes so dramatic, I'm not sure who these people are trying to convince lolol.

I was very extroverted as a kid and in my early teens, it's weird how I ended up the way I am. I think it is like a process of moulting, you go on with a specific model for a while and then you feel a disharmony with your model that prompts the thought that it is a failure and sort of reboot. I do agree though that this kind of change is far fetched in adulthood

 

[Inquisitor]

What about childhood? a lot of people did not start to consistently manifest whatever personality traits they have as adults until late adolescence

That's because the dominant function does not always develop first. To be honest, I am hazy as to how exactly type develops during childhood/adolescence. Not everything matures at the same rate. Look at the sometimes awkward/maladjusted configuration of a teenager's face and body. The nose is too big, the legs and arms grow faster than the rest of the body giving a gangly appearance, the neck is too long, etc. The ultimate developmental result, however, is inevitable.

I was very extroverted as a kid and in my early teens, it's weird how I ended up the way I am. I think it is like a process of moulting, you go on with a specific model for a while and then you feel a disharmony with your model that prompts the thought that it is a failure and sort of reboot. I do agree though that this kind of change is far fetched in adulthood

Moulting is not a bad analogy for this...

 

[Jennywocky]

That's because the dominant function does not always develop first.

Uhhhh.... come again? Isn't the dom function's definition that it's the first function that you develop? Because it is your preference?

For introverts, the dom function might not be as visible as the aux, because the aux is being extroverted and acts as the liaison between the inner world and the outer. Depending on the environmental conditions, the aux could get a workout early in life.

 

[8151147]

That's because the dominant function does not always develop first.

I intent to fix this misconception but someone already did. The bold just was correct. Notice that aux of Introverts not really "workout early". It just support the dom so the brother types never are the same.
Ne of INTP support the Ti while Ne of ENTP are the carry. So two Ne but serve different purpose, act differently

Uhhhh.... come again? Isn't the dom function's definition that it's the first function that you develop? Because it is your preference?

For introverts, the dom function might not be as visible as the aux, because the aux is being extroverted and acts as the liaison between the inner world and the outer. Depending on the environmental conditions, the aux could get a workout early in life.

 

[Yellow]

I think I've always been an INTP. It's almost eerie. Reading about cognitive functions, I see that the "phases" I went through growing up to now, which I thought were unique and molded by my experiences, were still classic examples.

Spoiler

I ran on Ti as far back as I can remember, with Ne showing up pretty darned early, but keeping a backseat. Then, Ne appeared to take over in my early-mid teens. Ti regained control in late teens/early twenties. Now, I'm developing the Si a bit (which really didn't become a factor until my late 20's), and my trying to force my Fe to kick in early by actively working on it.

 

[Spirit]

According to jungian experts, the more time a person makes decisions outside of their preferred preferences, their perception or judgements are more likely to be faulty.

So even if you say environment forces a person to act out of type, that individual is likely to experience frustration or cognitive dissonance - two opposing perspectives.

if you are right handed, you can learn or be forced to learn to use your left. But your left will not be as natural as your right hand.

Fighters experience this all the time.

 

[Sinny91]

Hm. I was trying to convince myself that I wasn't always the 'uncaring' INTP.
I feel like in an ideal world, I wouldn't be so INTPish.
Before I dicovered Typology, I assumed state of mind was largely formed by our perception and reaction to external forces. It is after all a harsh, and unnatural world. That is primitive in hind sight, but the only psychology I was exposed to was that of childhood trauma, and other main stream mantra.

 

[Inquisitor]

Uhhhh.... come again? Isn't the dom function's definition that it's the first function that you develop? Because it is your preference?

No. Not necessarily. See below.

For introverts, the dom function might not be as visible as the aux, because the aux is being extroverted and acts as the liaison between the inner world and the outer. Depending on the environmental conditions, the aux could get a workout early in life.

This is true.

I intent to fix this misconception but someone already did. The bold just was correct. Notice that aux of Introverts not really "workout early". It just support the dom so the brother types never are the same.
Ne of INTP support the Ti while Ne of ENTP are the carry. So two Ne but serve different purpose, act differently

No misconception here. I think we need to be careful about making blanket statements about how personality develops for different people. It's not just a matter of "dominant develops first because it's the preferred function." It's going to vary greatly across the type spectrum. People are free to disagree, but my understanding is that, for INTPs at least, very early on you're not actually developing Ti first with everything following that. In order for Ti to do its parsing function, it needs to have something to parse. So Si is the function that would seem to get a big workout initially. In addition, Fe is judging function that helps us understand social frameworks and values. It helps us make sense of what "mother" means to us for instance. This happens way before Fe becomes the "trickster" that causes INTPs to crave validation from others. The point is, there needs to be a storehouse of knowledge first. Once a certain level of information has been acquired, the inferior functions don't get used the majority of the time. Instead, we primarily use our dom/aux. The other functions still get used, but in decreasing proportion to the dom/aux. That, in turn, is why a tug-of-war starts to happen between Ti-Fe as we get older. My theory based on my personal experience FWIW. I disagree with Drenth's take on this.

For instance, when I was younger, I used to love memorizing facts about animals, airplanes, submarines, the human body. I sucked up information like no other. This is most definitely not Ti. I also enjoyed building legos, but in the beginning, it was not free form. I followed the instruction manual. It wasn't until much later that I assembled legos without a manual, and by that time, I had basically lost interest in them. Too hands-on. I also enjoyed playing with action figures and imagining stories/scenes in my head and drawing. I lost interest in all of those activities...and yet some people never do.

 

[Sinny91]

What is the function responsible for absorbing all those facts in youth? The same. Went for me.

 

[8151147]

No misconception here. I think we need to be careful about making blanket statements about how personality develops for different people. It's not just a matter of "dominant develops first because it's the preferred function." It's going to vary greatly across the type spectrum. People are free to disagree, but my understanding is that, for INTPs at least, very early on you're not actually developing Ti first with everything following that. In order for Ti to do its parsing function, it needs to have something to parse. So Si is the function that would seem to get a big workout initially. In addition, Fe is judging function that helps us understand social frameworks and values. It helps us make sense of what "mother" means to us for instance. This happens way before Fe becomes the "trickster" that causes INTPs to crave validation from others. The point is, there needs to be a storehouse of knowledge first. Once a certain level of information has been acquired, the inferior functions don't get used the majority of the time. Instead, we primarily use our dom/aux. The other functions still get used, but in decreasing proportion to the dom/aux. That, in turn, is why a tug-of-war starts to happen between Ti-Fe as we get older. My theory based on my personal experience FWIW. I disagree with Drenth's take on this.

For instance, when I was younger, I used to love memorizing facts about animals, airplanes, submarines, the human body. I sucked up information like no other. This is most definitely not Ti. I also enjoyed building legos, but in the beginning, it was not free form. I followed the instruction manual. It wasn't until much later that I assembled legos without a manual, and by that time, I had basically lost interest in them. Too hands-on. I also enjoyed playing with action figures and imagining stories/scenes in my head and drawing. I lost interest in all of those activities...and yet some people never do.

The bold: that's a theory about figuring how cognitive functions develop from childhood to adult. But if a theory against the original core that Dominant function is the first function develop, it's a wrong theory.

You just confused about cognitive function concept. It wasn't simple and straight like that.

The bold underline pointed out what you misunderstood here. You just misunderstood a certain habit is a manifestation of a function. Loving memorizing something is unnecessary manifestation of Si. It actually manifested Ti-Ne, facts and knowledge. Si is actually about experience. Memorizing something but not for taking part of action(Te, Fe) then it's not Si. You just memorized certain knowledge, facts about objects, it's not about how to doing something, or certain details that is very important to do it.

 

[Architect]

Interesting that a non existent OP (just a title) elicits such good discussion. From here on I'm going to start threads with just a title and empty post.

Type is wired. Jung himself said that mid-life crises are usually due to a person being 'trained' in childhood to act against their type. By midlife the inborn Type rebels. I experienced this, I've written about the strong STJ household I grew up in. At midlife my type said "cut it out, start acting like an INTP you fucker" You can't experience that and not know - viscerally - that type is programmed into us.

If not that, then have kids as JW and I have. They're born with it. Now if you want to know how I became a good INTP, a professional, well that takes practice.

I was very extroverted as a kid and in my early teens, it's weird how I ended up the way I am.

I've written about this, it's common. All young kids are extraverted practically as it's all about going out into the world and exploring. There's a big shiny interesting otherness outside there, even the introverts come out of their shell. But once the newness wears off and people mature, the inborn type asserts.

You see this with other introverts, we know an obvious ISTP friend of my sons, who was always the life of the party. Now in middle school he's withdrawing. Go figure. Mainline type seems to coincide with teenage/middle school.

 

[Inquisitor]

The bold: that's a theory about figuring how cognitive functions develop from childhood to adult. But if a theory against the original core that Dominant function is the first function develop, it's a wrong theory.

You just confused about cognitive function concept. It wasn't simple and straight like that.

No. Sorry. You're the one who's confused. Just because a function is dominant does not mean that it develops first. "Dominance" simply means one part of your brain is exceptionally efficient at doing certain things. Remember the "wiring" analogy? If the brain is like a multi-core CPU, the Ti core will be super advanced in INTPs. That doesn't mean that Ti gets used first and more often during the initial stages. It is used preferentially where possible, but with a relatively blank hard drive, there's not much that Ti can compute. That comes a little later. If the experience of others contradicts this, I would be interested in hearing about it.

The bold underline pointed out what you misunderstood here. You just misunderstood a certain habit is a manifestation of a function. Loving memorizing something is unnecessary manifestation of Si. It actually manifested Ti-Ne, facts and knowledge.

You're not making any sense here. Maybe it's because we're having communication issues, but there is no such thing as "unnecessary manifestation of Si." The point I was making is that in order to use Ti-Ne, you have to have to meet some minimum threshold of knowledge first.

Si is actually about experience. Memorizing something but not for taking part of action(Te, Fe) then it's not Si. You just memorized certain knowledge, facts about objects, it's not about how to doing something, or certain details that is very important to do it.

No, wrong again. You're confused about what functions really are. You wouldn't make a statement like this if you had read typology books like Lenore Thomson's "Personality Type: An Owner's Manual." A function has a purpose/role independent of the type in which it is found. And it's not true either that Si will collect information only for the sake of "taking part in action." It's true that Si takes in facts according to certain "inner priorities," but ISTJs (who are Si-dominant) intrinsically love taking in information. My father, for example, is an ISTJ. He says the most enjoyable part of his job being a doctor is collecting people's stories. When I ask him why he likes that, the answer is, "because I like hearing about it." He is a hoarder of everything, information included. INTPs are also information junkies, but usually only when they want to figure out "how something works."

When I was memorizing those facts as a child, I did it for its own sake. There was no Ti-Ne agenda. Later on, I lost interest in memorizing facts unless there was some overarching purpose. Those books I used to read are collecting dust in my library. Watching shows like "How It's Made" are great quick fixes for INTPs because you get to figure out the overarching idea operating behind a certain manufacturing process.

We are in agreement that Ne can develop before Ti, and that it plays a supporting role to the dominant however.

 

[Spirit]

Interesting that a non existent OP (just a title) elicits such good discussion. From here on I'm going to start threads with just a title and empty post.

Type is wired. Jung himself said that mid-life crises are usually due to a person being 'trained' in childhood to act against their type. By midlife the inborn Type rebels. I experienced this, I've written about the strong STJ household I grew up in. At midlife my type said "cut it out, start acting like an INTP you fucker" You can't experience that and not know - viscerally - that type is programmed into us.

If not that, then have kids as JW and I have. They're born with it. Now if you want to know how I became a good INTP, a professional, well that takes practice.



I've written about this, it's common. All young kids are extraverted practically as it's all about going out into the world and exploring. There's a big shiny interesting otherness outside there, even the introverts come out of their shell. But once the newness wears off and people mature, the inborn type asserts.

You see this with other introverts, we know an obvious ISTP friend of my sons, who was always the life of the party. Now in middle school he's withdrawing. Go figure. Mainline type seems to coincide with teenage/middle school.

I can relate to this. I came from a heavy SJ family. My mother I suspect was an enfj. So I had a heavy dose of Si, Fe and Te from most of my environment. My mom then gave me an even heavier dose of Fe early.

I think this caused some real issues early. I spent a lot of time using those unconscious preferences. My life was really hit and miss as a result. In hindsight, I was really stressed out.

As I re aligned with my true preferences, my life has been much better. I'm better at workin with clients ...

Anyway dear diary.

There is some evidence to support understanding how you think can provide you with better results in making decisions.

 

[8151147]

No. Sorry. You're the one who's confused. Just because a function is dominant does not mean that it develops first. "Dominance" simply means one part of your brain is exceptionally efficient at doing certain things.

I think we need to define what is "Develop" here first before the main argument.

I believe there are something acts as basic units more than cognitive functions. We may be programmed by that unit/the core when we was born, so for an INTP the "development" of functions will not be like Ti appear first, then Ne, then Si, then Fe... It would be all of 4 function appear at the same time, but what can be recognized first or last, is what "develop" mean here, by how strong it is compared to others.

"Develop" here means the tendency of how we act or think through the cognition. We focus on it and it grows up naturally. So we have two cases here:

1. There are no order for four functions. Aux, Ter, and even Inferior can appear before the Dom and develop better than it. But by some reasons and after certain period(?), the Dom grow stronger and surpass other, and become "dominant function" as it used to be called.

2. There are some core determined the four functions and their seeds appear at the same time. But the Dom grow up first and stronger, faster than other, that's why it is called Dom. By certain age in our life the rest grow up in turn after the Dom.

The second case is the familiar with most CFs definitions you can find on internet.
Is the first case what you mean? Or if an Inferior can develop before the Dominant, why it stop grow stronger. What valid reason here for it?

You're not making any sense here. Maybe it's because we're having communication issues, but there is no such thing as "unnecessary manifestation of Si." The point I was making is that in order to use Ti-Ne, you have to have to meet some minimum threshold of knowledge first.

No, wrong again. You're confused about what functions really are. You wouldn't make a statement like this if you had read typology books like Lenore Thomson's "Personality Type: An Owner's Manual." A function has a purpose/role independent of the type in which it is found.

And it's not true either that Si will collect information only for the sake of "taking part in action." It's true that Si takes in facts according to certain "inner priorities," but ISTJs (who are Si-dominant) intrinsically love taking in information.

We are in agreement that Ne can develop before Ti, and that it plays a supporting role to the dominant however.

Can you point out what was exactly I wrong here? There are no official definition of full of 8 cognitive functions so I collect some of definition that described it decently.

Introverted Sensing often involves storing data and information, then comparing and contrasting the current situation with similar ones.

The process also involves reviewing the past to draw on the lessons of history, hindsight, and experience.

With introverted Sensing, there is often great attention to detail and getting a clear picture of goals and objectives and what is to happen. There can be a oneness with ageless customs that help sustain civilization and culture and protect what is known and long-lasting, even while what is reliable changes.

http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/Cognitive-Functions/Introverted-Sensing.cfm

Introverted Sensing: Compares present facts and experiences to past experience. Trusts the past.Stores sensory data for future use.

http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-...amics/the-eight-function-attitudes.htm?bhcp=1

I can't see I was wrong, but your misconception about what manifested the Introvert sensing. Can you see how you defined the Si differently compared to these definitions above, to the phrases I bold them?

For instance, when I was younger, I used to love memorizing facts about animals, airplanes, submarines, the human body. I sucked up information like no other. This is most definitely not Ti.

The bold underlined: you memorizing facts and knowledge for "its own sake" as you admitted, it's not kind of experience get a clear picture of goals and what is to happen. Your facts are for nothing. That's why I said

for taking part of action(Te, Fe)

because every function must follow the rule correlated each other: Si can't pair with Se/Ne/Ni but must be either Fe or Te. Te/Fe is judging extrovert function so they decide the action, unlike Ne/Se which can't pair with Si. What I mean is simple: your bold underlined is not Si as you thought.

That's why I didn't said you are really wrong, but misconception. I'm willing to listen your reasons for case 1. I don't think it's a bad theory as long as it not against the dom/aux/infe/teri function concepts.

You wouldn't make a statement like this if you had read typology books like Lenore Thomson's "Personality Type: An Owner's Manual."

I've not read that book yet. Can you point out what it has that against my post meaning?

 

[Inquisitor]

I think we need to define what is "Develop" here first before the main argument.

I believe there are something acts as basic units more than cognitive functions. We may be programmed by that unit/the core when we was born, so for an INTP the "development" of functions will not be like Ti appear first, then Ne, then Si, then Fe... It would be all of 4 function appear at the same time, but what can be recognized first or last, is what "develop" mean here, by how strong it is compared to others.

"Develop" here means the tendency of how we act or think through the cognition. We focus on it and it grows up naturally.

Ok, so you raise some interesting points in this post. I will try to respond to each of them. The first thing you wrote here..I disagree with it. I think type is actually pre-determined at the genetic level. The idea that people randomly end up using one function preferentially, and that this is the reason why they ultimately end up X-dominant doesn't make any sense to me. If you look at the distribution of type in the population, some types are much more common than others. ISTJs are between 3-14X more common than INFJs. So it doesn't seem to be the case that type develops after you are born. We would see a much more even distribution in that scenario.

So we have two cases here:

1. There are no order for four functions. Aux, Ter, and even Inferior can appear before the Dom and develop better than it. But by some reasons and after certain period(?), the Dom grow stronger and surpass other, and become "dominant function" as it used to be called.

2. There are some core determined the four functions and their seeds appear at the same time. But the Dom grow up first and stronger, faster than other, that's why it is called Dom. By certain age in our life the rest grow up in turn after the Dom.

The second case is the familiar with most CFs definitions you can find on internet.
Is the first case what you mean? Or if an Inferior can develop before the Dominant, why it stop grow stronger. What valid reason here for it?

The first case is more in line with what I believe to be true. You might disagree, and my ideas may be at odds with a lot of what is online. Dominant = Most efficient function. That is genetic. I can use Ti all day long without feeling exhausted at the end of the day. But if I try to do the same with my other functions, I can and do feel wiped out. As an ESL teacher, I know what I'm talking about in that regard. My job just requires too much psychic energy for me to be able to do it the whole day. Other teachers are able to do it though. Because the Dominant is so efficient, it will always be used in preference to the other functions, and the personality develops around that. So maybe "develop" is a bad word, but I believe other functions can and do get used more than the dominant early on, depending on the environment. This does not mean that those other functions are more efficient or "better" or "stronger." I don't know if what I said makes sense...?

Can you point out what was exactly I wrong here? There are no official definition of full of 8 cognitive functions so I collect some of definition that described it decently.

http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/Cognitive-Functions/Introverted-Sensing.cfm
http://www.myersbriggs.org/my-mbti-...amics/the-eight-function-attitudes.htm?bhcp=1

Those descriptions don't seem wrong to me. They're a bit on the short side though and too simplistic.

I can't see I was wrong, but your misconception about what manifested the Introvert sensing. Can you see how you defined the Si differently compared to these definitions above, to the phrases I bold them?

Yes, there is an apparent small difference. But part of Si's job is collecting information and forming a subjective impression of that information. This is what I experienced when I was younger. Thinking back on it, I was comparing all those new factoids to what I had learned before. For instance, I memorized the look and brand names of various cars on the road. Each new car I saw, I would compare it to other cars I had already seen. I have a hard time seeing how this is Ti in action. Please feel free to explain it to me if you think you have the answer.

The bold underlined: you memorizing facts and knowledge for "its own sake" as you admitted, it's not kind of experience get a clear picture of goals and what is to happen. Your facts are for nothing.

We are in agreement here.

That's why I said because every function must follow the rule correlated each other: Si can't pair with Se/Ne/Ni but must be either Fe or Te. Te/Fe is judging extrovert function so they decide the action, unlike Ne/Se which can't pair with Si. What I mean is simple: your bold underlined is not Si as you thought.

That's why I didn't said you are really wrong, but misconception. I'm willing to listen your reasons for case 1. I don't think it's a bad theory as long as it not against the dom/aux/infe/teri function concepts.

So you're right that Si can't pair with other forms of S or N. One of these has to be relatively more "conscious," as Jung states. But to be honest, I don't really understand what you're saying about the rest. Si is found together with Ne in an INTP. I think you're mixing things up, but I'm willing to listen to why you think what I said can't be Si.

I've not read that book yet. Can you point out what it has that against my post meaning?

Your post has motivated me to go read CG Jung's collected works. I am going to read this:

The Development of Personality (Collected Works of C.G. Jung Vol.17): C. G. Jung, Gerhard Adler, R. F.C. Hull: 9780691018386: Amazon.com: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H4trunkgL.@@AMEPARAM@@41H4trunkgL

As far as I understand it, Si is a way of describing an independent, stand-alone, orientation to the world. It is found in a number of personality types, but it varies in its degree of "consciousness." In an ISTJ/ISFJ, Si is fully conscious. In an INTP, it is fairly unconscious, and therefore, "primitive." Let's say you're right that Si does not ever function independently of Te or Fe (where did you hear that btw?), is it not conceivable then that memorizing all those things appealed to my inferior at the time?

 

[Inquisitor]

That's why I said because every function must follow the rule correlated each other: Si can't pair with Se/Ne/Ni but must be either Fe or Te. Te/Fe is judging extrovert function so they decide the action, unlike Ne/Se which can't pair with Si.

After further reflection, I think I understand what you're saying. In any functional stack, Si will always be found next to either Te or Fe. According to this book:

Personality Type: An Owner's Manual (Jung on the Hudson Book Series) - Kindle edition by Lenore Thomson. Health, Fitness & Dieting Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51LoCWE%2B3xL.@@AMEPARAM@@51LoCWE%2B3xL

This is the way the brain is mapped out according to PET scans:

Front of Left Brain
Te
Fe
Si
Ni
Back of Left Brain

Front of Right Brain
Ne
Se
Fi
Ti
Back of Right Brain

As you can see from this map (which I am not certain is totally accurate btw), Si would seem to be in the same hemisphere as Te and Fe. So in that sense, you might have a point that these functions all support one another, i.e. when one of them "lights up," the others are likely to get activated at least somewhat as well.

This map contradicts another diagram I saw on the Benziger website:

Benziger Physiological Foundations

There is also the issue of the "sandwiched functions." Thomson writes it like this for INTP:

Dominant: Ti
Auxiliary: Ne
Right Brain Alternatives: Fi/Se
Left Brain Double Agents: Ni/Te
Tertiary: Si
Inferior: Fe

It makes sense to me that all of these functions must get developed up to a point. But again, none of them are going to be as efficient as the dominant, hence they ultimately remain fairly primitive.

So given this information, how would you explain why I was very interested in collecting factoids but then lost interest in doing this as I matured?

 

[8151147]

The first thing you wrote here..I disagree with it. I think type is actually pre-determined at the genetic level. The idea that people randomly end up using one function preferentially, and that this is the reason why they ultimately end up X-dominant doesn't make any sense to me. If you look at the distribution of type in the population, some types are much more common than others. ISTJs are between 3-14X more common than INFJs. So it doesn't seem to be the case that type develops after you are born. We would see a much more even distribution in that scenario.

what the. That's what I mean. Did you misread my post or something?

I believe there are something acts as basic units more than cognitive functions. We may be programmed by that unit/the core when we was born, so for an INTP the "development" of functions will not be like Ti appear first, then Ne, then Si, then Fe... It would be all of 4 function appear at the same time, but what can be recognized first or last, is what "develop" mean here, by how strong it is compared to others.

I'm not a native English one so I'm glad that you use a precise words like "pre-determined". And your bold are the same meaning as my underlined phrase. However it's more similar to the case 2 than case 1 as I stated.

I assumed your previous post means four functions work like this: Dom "born" when we was in childhood time, the rest not born yet, then Aux born when we around adult period, and so on... That's not how functions work because one people can't be a "Ti type" when he was a child, then some factors determined he will be either an INTP or an ISTP. Human biology and psychology don't work that way. People born with the specified MBTI type. But I can see we are in agreement here.

The first case is more in line with what I believe to be true. You might disagree, and my ideas may be at odds with a lot of what is online. Dominant = Most efficient function. That is genetic.

Or if you believe the first case, you still didn't explain me fully your reasoning for it.

Assumed as you stated, that the Aux, Ter, Infer may develop first before the Dom in certain times early life, then by some reasons the Dom replace them to the rest of the life. Doesn't matter if a function develop first or not, if you recognized its exist then it must be strong enough to be discerned, right? Actually the "Develop strongly" already contain necessary attributes or processes, like the first, the strongest, the most naturally, the frequently use...etc Assumed this is you in childhood: Si is the first (and also strongest so you can discern it rather than Ti), then Ne, Ti, Fe... How other people can see you as an Si people? it pair to Fe to become Si-Fe stack, or something? It just doesn't make sense.

Yes, there is an apparent small difference. But part of Si's job is collecting information and forming a subjective impression of that information. This is what I experienced when I was younger. Thinking back on it, I was comparing all those new factoids to what I had learned before. For instance, I memorized the look and brand names of various cars on the road. Each new car I saw, I would compare it to other cars I had already seen. I have a hard time seeing how this is Ti in action. Please feel free to explain it to me if you think you have the answer.

So you're right that Si can't pair with other forms of S or N. One of these has to be relatively more "conscious," as Jung states. But to be honest, I don't really understand what you're saying about the rest. Si is found together with Ne in an INTP. I think you're mixing things up, but I'm willing to listen to why you think what I said can't be Si.

I know my grammar sucked but I will try to explain it carefully. And that's not a small difference, it was a big difference actually. There are two problems here:

- Assumed that your habit loving memorizing about certain objects is Si function, you can't rely on only your story or someone else's. Because it was true with you but not with other, even if we are all INTPs. Even if you give a sample data statistic, it will never enough to conclude your Si function develop before your Ti. That's why I expected you quote some important contents from the book you said, to explain why other functions can develop before the Dom.

- Your mistake here was like you notice one foreigner's characteristics and you conclude most people from that country have the same characteristics like that foreigner. It' hasty and incomplete. The problem here is not about "collecting information and forming a subjective impression of that information" like you said. Every functions memorize something, not only Si. The problem here is about the relationships between the functions. You need to focus on it to recognized what your behaviors correlated to certain functions, not function. In your case it is about collect for what, not only simply collect what. Si and Ni is about collecting information from internal world to imagine what will happen if we do it, like a way to do something. Knowledge, facts, details... are just part of that process.

when I was younger, I used to love memorizing facts about animals, airplanes, submarines, the human body.

This is actually sound like Ti-Ne to me rather than Si. And I didn't say it Ne but Ti-Ne because functions work together, not solo. When we talk about independent function, it serve for analyzing the function itself, in theory. But if we want to know these, those behaviors are manifested of what function, we have to talk about axis or relationship, they must be a pair of functions or even more.

The Dom is not only the strongest, but also the unique function that the rest work for it. The Aux support the Ti, the Ter support the Aux for indirectly supporting Dom, and so on with the Infer. All of them must served the Dom. That's why although one type can act, and do something with certain abilities like other types, but they will never be able to fake other no matter they unconsciously do it or not.

And in case my post may still cause confused, I give an example about INTP type. Note that it just an example, some INTP may develop their non-Dom functions faster than other, so the timeline is not fixed.

- Childhood: only Ti and weak but strong enough to be recognized Ne. Symptoms: lack of awareness to environment around, very innocence and blithe...

- Crisis: can't adapt to the environment and social because of emotionless. Can't stick to do something routine because lack of interest in most important things in life.

- Teen: Ne develop stronger. Symptoms: show some good sign at potentially certain abstract fields...

- Crisis: still sucked to the social

- Above Adult: Ne fully develop to support the Ti, it's different to the Ne dominant of ENTP or ENFP. Symptoms: smart and witty, better at adapting to social...

- Crisis: Made many mistakes because of Ne. Hard to do something completely.

- Middle-Aged: Si and weaker Fe develop to replace Ne to support Ti, . Symptoms: stick to certain fields that they good at, have certain goals in life. Slow but certain...

- Crisis: still hard to form certain relationships. Still can't enjoy life fully.

- Old and near to die: Fe develop fully to support Si to indirectly serve Ti. Symptoms: smile and express emotions freely, care and serve other by Ti way(unlike Fe people EFxJ or IFxJ)

- Crisis: no more crisis here. You just develop fully your four cognitive functions and can both enjoy and master your own life, bitches.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

... At midlife my type said "cut it out, start acting like an INTP you fucker" You can't experience that and not know - viscerally - that type is programmed into us.

If not that, then have kids as JW and I have.

*zzzzzziiiiiipppp* -rips the phonograph stylus from off the record-

wait. hold up. You and Jennywocky made little Architect+Jennywockys?

Need Conan OBrien to do one of his spawn mash up caricatures.

 

[Jennywocky]

Type is wired. Jung himself said that mid-life crises are usually due to a person being 'trained' in childhood to act against their type. By midlife the inborn Type rebels. I experienced this, I've written about the strong STJ household I grew up in. At midlife my type said "cut it out, start acting like an INTP you fucker" You can't experience that and not know - viscerally - that type is programmed into us.

Kind of funny, but since I left my marriage and got divorced and dealt with the eddies of change (for those few years), my life has dropped back into a more cliche INTP position. I spend much of my time alone, even though I would like to have a few friendships, and spend my time pursuing projects or absorbing information or going out to explore things... and being okay with that. I also no longer participate in structured religion, I just don't see a need for it or have to deal with pressure from others who think I should be; I'm fine as I am. It's interesting -- I kind of did my thing when young, then learned a lot of behaviors in the process of "socialization" and got a really good grasp of how others work, but now I'm kind of like, "Okay, I understand it now,' and have removed myself from all that again to go back to being me.

So much of my life back in the Old World was spent honoring obligations, maintaining a stable house, investing in obligatory relationships, etc. I was going bugnuts but couldn't necessarily articulate it as such.

I do wish I had someone around to bounce ideas off / do things with, and I think my kids are great when we get to spend time together; but otherwise I'm happier than I ever was in the past years of adulthood. I also don't apologize anymore for being this way, even if my family (aside from the kids) doesn't quite get me.

wait. hold up. You and Jennywocky made little Architect+Jennywockys?

Shhh, no one was supposed to know about our robot army!

+ [BIMG]http://www.matrixresolutions.com/img/oraclesitting.jpg[/BIMG]

=

They are exceedingly efficient and rational little Archiwockies and Jennytects.
....

but yeah, the kids (even if exact type isn't clear) exude type even from birth. Comparing two random babies, you can note differences in degree of adaptability, pleasantness, sound levels, curiosity, etc, and it just gets more obvious as they develop / become mobile, learn how to talk, pursue what interests them, etc.

 

[DrGregoryHouse]

Shhh, no one was supposed to know about our robot army!

+ [BIMG]http://www.matrixresolutions.com/img/oraclesitting.jpg[/BIMG]

=

They are exceedingly efficient and rational little Archiwockies and Jennytects.
....

 

[Inquisitor]

what the. That's what I mean. Did you misread my post or something?

I'm not a native English one so I'm glad that you use a precise words like "pre-determined". And your bold are the same meaning as my underlined phrase. However it's more similar to the case 2 than case 1 as I stated.

I assumed your previous post means four functions work like this: Dom "born" when we was in childhood time, the rest not born yet, then Aux born when we around adult period, and so on... That's not how functions work because one people can't be a "Ti type" when he was a child, then some factors determined he will be either an INTP or an ISTP. Human biology and psychology don't work that way. People born with the specified MBTI type. But I can see we are in agreement here.

Ok. To be honest I'm having a hard time understanding you, but it looks like we agree. I believe type is determined genetically...so my belief is that the whole organism takes shape along certain pathways. Type appears in clusters in the population. You're not likely to find an INTP that is endomorphic for example. They're usually all ecto/meso.

Or if you believe the first case, you still didn't explain me fully your reasoning for it.

Assumed as you stated, that the Aux, Ter, Infer may develop first before the Dom in certain times early life, then by some reasons the Dom replace them to the rest of the life. Doesn't matter if a function develop first or not, if you recognized its exist then it must be strong enough to be discerned, right? Actually the "Develop strongly" already contain necessary attributes or processes, like the first, the strongest, the most naturally, the frequently use...etc Assumed this is you in childhood: Si is the first (and also strongest so you can discern it rather than Ti), then Ne, Ti, Fe... How other people can see you as an Si people? it pair to Fe to become Si-Fe stack, or something? It just doesn't make sense.

No it makes sense, you just didn't understand my meaning apparently. Again, it's not about stronger/weaker, it's about efficiency and chronology. Ti is the most efficient function in an INTP. In other words, when it operates, it consumes very little energy, yet delivers big results. That's why I can spend all day problem-solving with abstract concepts and not be tired at the end of it. Someone else whose Ti is much lower on the functional stack will find doing the same kind of activity draining. This is because their brain has to consume a lot more energy to be able to deliver the same results. Is this clear now? This seems to have been verified experimentally:

MBTI Physiology

The question I am raising is whether or not the most efficient function appears before all the others. I am saying that I think the other functions, such as Si, Fe, and Ne may appear outwardly (in behavior, thought process, likes/dislikes) before the dominant.

I know my grammar sucked but I will try to explain it carefully. And that's not a small difference, it was a big difference actually. There are two problems here:

- Assumed that your habit loving memorizing about certain objects is Si function, you can't rely on only your story or someone else's. Because it was true with you but not with other, even if we are all INTPs. Even if you give a sample data statistic, it will never enough to conclude your Si function develop before your Ti. That's why I expected you quote some important contents from the book you said, to explain why other functions can develop before the Dom.

I never said Si develops first in all INTPs. I don't even know what that means. What I am saying is that different functions may manifest or appear outwardly in the behavior or thought processes of an individual at different points in time, and that in my case, I believe I went through a stage where Si somehow asserted itself for a time, and then it didn't

- Your mistake here was like you notice one foreigner's characteristics and you conclude most people from that country have the same characteristics like that foreigner. It' hasty and incomplete. The problem here is not about "collecting information and forming a subjective impression of that information" like you said. Every functions memorize something, not only Si. The problem here is about the relationships between the functions. You need to focus on it to recognized what your behaviors correlated to certain functions, not function. In your case it is about collect for what, not only simply collect what. Si and Ni is about collecting information from internal world to imagine what will happen if we do it, like a way to do something. Knowledge, facts, details... are just part of that process.
This is actually sound like Ti-Ne to me rather than Si. And I didn't say it Ne but Ti-Ne because functions work together, not solo. When we talk about independent function, it serve for analyzing the function itself, in theory. But if we want to know these, those behaviors are manifested of what function, we have to talk about axis or relationship, they must be a pair of functions or even more.

The first italics phrase is what you assumed. I never said all INTPs go through the same developmental process. This is going to vary. The first bold segment is questionable. Where are you getting that from? The second bold is incorrect. Si is not about imagination. The italics part is true; Ti-Ne work together. Your interpretation of what I went through is certainly a possibility. My interpretation could be wrong.

The Dom is not only the strongest, but also the unique function that the rest work for it. The Aux support the Ti, the Ter support the Aux for indirectly supporting Dom, and so on with the Infer. All of them must served the Dom. That's why although one type can act, and do something with certain abilities like other types, but they will never be able to fake other no matter they unconsciously do it or not.

That's your theory. I don't think Jung would agree with you. Yes, the other functions "support" the dominant, but that doesn't mean they are its slaves and cannot act independently. Your argument can be easily disproven if we look at the fact that INTPs in general are frequently led astray by their inferior. You tell me how this is an example of Fe supporting Ti? You need to think about this like Jung: some functions are more "conscious" than others in any individual. Each function is still capable of performing the same kinds of mental tasks, albeit more or less efficiently.

And in case my post may still cause confused, I give an example about INTP type. Note that it just an example, some INTP may develop their non-Dom functions faster than other, so the timeline is not fixed.

- Childhood: only Ti and weak but strong enough to be recognized Ne. Symptoms: lack of awareness to environment around, very innocence and blithe...

- Crisis: can't adapt to the environment and social because of emotionless. Can't stick to do something routine because lack of interest in most important things in life.

- Teen: Ne develop stronger. Symptoms: show some good sign at potentially certain abstract fields...

- Crisis: still sucked to the social

- Above Adult: Ne fully develop to support the Ti, it's different to the Ne dominant of ENTP or ENFP. Symptoms: smart and witty, better at adapting to social...

- Crisis: Made many mistakes because of Ne. Hard to do something completely.

- Middle-Aged: Si and weaker Fe develop to replace Ne to support Ti, . Symptoms: stick to certain fields that they good at, have certain goals in life. Slow but certain...

- Crisis: still hard to form certain relationships. Still can't enjoy life fully.

- Old and near to die: Fe develop fully to support Si to indirectly serve Ti. Symptoms: smile and express emotions freely, care and serve other by Ti way(unlike Fe people EFxJ or IFxJ)

- Crisis: no more crisis here. You just develop fully your four cognitive functions and can both enjoy and master your own life, bitches.

Where are you getting this from? Is this your personal experience? Someone else's? As a child, I was never the way you described. This shows that certain functions manifest more strongly in different people at different times during growth and development. Even though two people may have the same type, i.e. dominant is the same for both, I don't think we grow like robots. It's a fairly haphazard process I would think, and highly contingent on environment and upbringing.

 

[Architect]

They are exceedingly efficient and rational little Archiwockies and Jennytects.

Sounds like a couple of Star Wars alien races.

It's interesting -- I kind of did my thing when young, then learned a lot of behaviors in the process of "socialization" and got a really good grasp of how others work, but now I'm kind of like, "Okay, I understand it now,' and have removed myself from all that again to go back to being me.

Yup. I can still put on the charm like the old days, but usually don't bother. Pretty nice place to be actually.

 

[8151147]

Ok. To be honest I'm having a hard time understanding you, but it looks like we agree. I believe type is determined genetically...so my belief is that the whole organism takes shape along certain pathways. Type appears in clusters in the population. You're not likely to find an INTP that is endomorphic for example. They're usually all ecto/meso.

You just really made me feel so nervous and ashamed myself lol. Sometime I really want to join a discussion about complex topics on this forum like history, philosophy, technology or such but my poor grammar just hole me back.

The second bold is incorrect. Si is not about imagination.

The word "imagine" maybe a bad word to describe precisely, it wasn't a wrong word though. I think " visualize" or "figure" is better. And that's how Si/Ni work. Don't ever think that imagination is something exclude from Ne/Ni. Si/Ni figure the context/background from inner information. And your objects and facts hardly can't be inner information, they were outer information(Ne).

Every functions memorize something, not only Si

My bad that I use "every", actually they were only perceiving functions:Ne, Se, Ni, Si. Si memorized information from the past, Ni memorize too, but not from the past of the individual. Ne Se also memorized or gather information, but not from the past. Your memorize habit is not enough to claim it is Si manifestation.

No it makes sense, you just didn't understand my meaning apparently. Again, it's not about stronger/weaker, it's about efficiency and chronology. Ti is the most efficient function in an INTP. In other words, when it operates, it consumes very little energy, yet delivers big results. That's why I can spend all day problem-solving with abstract concepts and not be tired at the end of it. Someone else whose Ti is much lower on the functional stack will find doing the same kind of activity draining. This is because their brain has to consume a lot more energy to be able to deliver the same results. Is this clear now? This seems to have been verified experimentally:

MBTI Physiology

The question I am raising is whether or not the most efficient function appears before all the others. I am saying that I think the other functions, such as Si, Fe, and Ne may appear outwardly (in behavior, thought process, likes/dislikes) before the dominant.

I never said Si develops first in all INTPs. I don't even know what that means. What I am saying is that different functions may manifest or appear outwardly in the behavior or thought processes of an individual at different points in time, and that in my case, I believe I went through a stage where Si somehow asserted itself for a time, and then it didn't

That's your theory. I don't think Jung would agree with you. Yes, the other functions "support" the dominant, but that doesn't mean they are its slaves and cannot act independently. Your argument can be easily disproven if we look at the fact that INTPs in general are frequently led astray by their inferior. You tell me how this is an example of Fe supporting Ti? You need to think about this like Jung: some functions are more "conscious" than others in any individual. Each function is still capable of performing the same kinds of mental tasks, albeit more or less efficiently.

No, I don't think I didn't understand your meaning. But I get your point deeper now and why you believe non-Dom function develop before Dom. It's because you misunderstood that one function can work dependently and we can recognized it from external world. I won't say that all functions work together all the time, however we can only discern a string of functions, you can't recognized one action or behavior is manifested of one solo function. It's like INTP and ISTP shared same behaviors, but it's not. Assumed that one function work solo, then we can't never see it from outside, it's just a part of a process, like a single segment moment of thinking.

Where are you getting this from? Is this your personal experience? Someone else's? As a child, I was never the way you described. This shows that certain functions manifest more strongly in different people at different times during growth and development. Even though two people may have the same type, i.e. dominant is the same for both, I don't think we grow like robots. It's a fairly haphazard process I would think, and highly contingent on environment and upbringing.

Just my experience from learning the basic cognitive functions, combined with 14 personality disorders of Oldham and Ptypes of Dave Kelly. But I would trust my intuition rather than other opinions. Don't expect me that I read advanced books about MBTI. Because if we all talking about something like "truth", "correct", then it doesn't matter it is said by a regular individual or a psychologist. I just learn from most basic sites like personalitypathway or myerbriggs.

 

[Jennywocky]

Yup. I can still put on the charm like the old days, but usually don't bother. Pretty nice place to be actually.

Do you ever feel like a jerk sometimes because of that?

For example, on another forum today, some posters were posting stupid things and I called them out on the points of stupidity -- I wasn't personally rude but was blunt and I know some people will read it as me being a jerk. I didn't care and let it ride. But I'm still aware now of when I'm likely "transgressing the social boundaries." I don't particularly want to be seen as a jerk, but I don't particularly care to placate people anymore either, unless I see it as beneficial to my own particular path in some way.

 

[Architect]

Do you ever feel like a jerk sometimes because of that?

Not much. Thanks for asking that, I've been puzzling about a issue with my ES/IS relatives and it helped me clarify something.

My take on it is that we're all jerks to each other, constantly. It's built into the nature of things. Your inferior is in somebodies dominant near you, and vice versa. You're being quiet is draining to the extraverts, and their loudness is draining you. My issue above is this, my ES relatives are pressuring us to be ES's like them really, by going to some yearly family reunion (which ends up being a big ES fest, as it's comprised of ES's). So whose is the jerk, them for bullying us to go, or us for not being a team player?

I could say them, because they are the ones who are trying to get us to do something. We are just doing our thing. But from their perspective, we barely visit, don't entertain them, etc. I've never been to one of their kids games, for example, as I hate sports events. They think, "what's the big deal?" not knowing life from my viewpoint. Trying to act like that costs me, a lot, and it never ends, it snowballs.

I wasn't personally rude but was blunt and I know some people will read it as me being a jerk.

Surely, but I wouldn't sweat it. As long as you're not abusive then it's par for the course.

 

[Jennywocky]

Not much. Thanks for asking that, I've been puzzling about a issue with my ES/IS relatives and it helped me clarify something.

My take on it is that we're all jerks to each other, constantly. It's built into the nature of things. Your inferior is in somebodies dominant near you, and vice versa. You're being quiet is draining to the extraverts, and their loudness is draining you. My issue above is this, my ES relatives are pressuring us to be ES's like them really, by going to some yearly family reunion (which ends up being a big ES fest, as it's comprised of ES's). So whose is the jerk, them for bullying us to go, or us for not being a team player?

I could say them, because they are the ones who are trying to get us to do something. We are just doing our thing. But from their perspective, we barely visit, don't entertain them, etc. I've never been to one of their kids games, for example, as I hate sports events. They think, "what's the big deal?" not knowing life from my viewpoint. Trying to act like that costs me, a lot, and it never ends, it snowballs.

Yeah, it was a huge thing for me when I realized that -- that as much as I read their extroverted ways as intrusive, they were likely reading my recalcitrant and withdrawn approach as not liking them, withholding myself, showing disdain for the relationship, etc. I mean, for me, it was just I'm introverted and can't handle the energy demands and stimulation and need more alone time.

So it was a two-way street to some degree... but it still didn't resolve anything, as they were still extroverted with sensory expectations and I was not. Kind of an impasse.

It does stress the importance of communication, even if neither side can reasonably conform to the expectations of the other. At least be clear about what's going on, so that people understand you care (or whatever the connection is there)... it's just your working styles that are creating friction when conflicting with each other.

Surely, but I wouldn't sweat it. As long as you're not abusive then it's par for the course.

Yeah, I'm not worried, I just have to be myself. And in a way it's liberating. But coming from a world where I had to tread more on eggshells for such a long time or be punished in some way, it's just that weird freaky feeling of no longer managing the behavior of others but just being me and letting them deal with it. Or maybe just a feeling of bemusement at watching yourself from the outside do things differently than you might have done them previously and trying to assess who you are from the outside, just from observation.

 

[Architect]

It does stress the importance of communication, even if neither side can reasonably conform to the expectations of the other. At least be clear about what's going on, so that people understand you care (or whatever the connection is there)... it's just your working styles that are creating friction when conflicting with each other.

This gets to my latest puzzling on this. I'm talking about IN-ES relationships predominantly. I get along well with IS types. There's simpatico. And obviously with the EN's and IN's, but I can't find much common ground with the ES types. Even with the IS types who act like ES types, like my ISTP brother and his ISFJ wife. The friction is too great.

They want chit-chat. I want discussion. They want socializing. I want to work on something (even together). They care about appearances. I care about qualia. They want experiences. I want realization.

On a basic human basis I like ES types, but its hard to get much beyond that. In the U.S. at least they just won't introspect. I can ES a bit, I do, I have social dinners with them, will do some event stuff they like, and so forth. It seems like I don't get much back, so I guess I suspect that I give them more than they give back, but I haven't been able to pin it down.

So you're absolutely right, if both sides understand and give up some of themselves for the relationship, then that's OK, but the problem is do they? My suspicions are that ES types give up the least, but I have't been able to prove that yet.

 

[Jennywocky]

This gets to my latest puzzling on this. I'm talking about IN-ES relationships predominantly. I get along well with IS types. There's simpatico. And obviously with the EN's and IN's, but I can't find much common ground with the ES types. Even with the IS types who act like ES types, like my ISTP brother and his ISFJ wife. The friction is too great.

My experience is similar, now that you mention it. I usually don't have trouble with the IS's who follow introverted behavioral patterns... although the ISJ's tend to have a more formalized sense of propriety/boundaries, so it's actually more of a crime to be invasive and cross the boundaries and not crossing boundaries (which by me could be the default, since I can have trouble even just engaging) is a positive thing and the ISPs are so casual that we just can get along without much friction (unless it's an ISFP and I somehow cross a value of theirs, whereupon they will dig in and then be fine after we resolve it).

My ISTJ ex-FIL was pretty cool and is still nice to me; my ISFJ ex-MIL is a total biatch because she's a control freak, which is more what you see from the ESFJs, and so instead of ESFJ aggression you just get ISFJ extreme passive-aggression (punctuated by some overt aggression).

I have an ESTJ friend who I'm decently close to and we'll visit each other; she's in her mid-20's, and she was raised by INTP+INFJ parents, so that has helped immensely; but still, there are times when we end up butting heads. The good point about her is that she'll just ask me flat out if there's a problem, and she's open to my answer. But our goals are sometimes very different.

So you're absolutely right, if both sides understand and give up some of themselves for the relationship, then that's OK, but the problem is do they? My suspicions are that ES types give up the least, but I have't been able to prove that yet.

I'd say just by type theory alone the IP flexes more and the ES less. By nature they're expansive and will chase things down. Typically a resolution where I'm not run over just involves me standing my ground long enough to say what I need to say, then calmly walking off, and letting them ponder it. ESPs are more open; the ESJs can be more stubborn.

 

[Inquisitor]

You just really made me feel so nervous and ashamed myself lol. Sometime I really want to join a discussion about complex topics on this forum like history, philosophy, technology or such but my poor grammar just hole me back.

Whatever your native language is, I guarantee you I can't speak or write it as well as you can English, so plz, don't be embarrassed.

The word "imagine" maybe a bad word to describe precisely, it wasn't a wrong word though. I think " visualize" or "figure" is better. And that's how Si/Ni work. Don't ever think that imagination is something exclude from Ne/Ni. Si/Ni figure the context/background from inner information. And your objects and facts hardly can't be inner information, they were outer information(Ne).

Still not quite sure I understand how this relates to what we were discussing. I will take a closer look at the functions. You make a good point about imagination being related to outside information. Ne is capable of making seemingly unique connections between various ideas

My bad that I use "every", actually they were only perceiving functions:Ne, Se, Ni, Si. Si memorized information from the past, Ni memorize too, but not from the past of the individual. Ne Se also memorized or gather information, but not from the past. Your memorize habit is not enough to claim it is Si manifestation.

Possible.

No, I don't think I didn't understand your meaning. But I get your point deeper now and why you believe non-Dom function develop before Dom. It's because you misunderstood that one function can work dependently and we can recognized it from external world. I won't say that all functions work together all the time, however we can only discern a string of functions, you can't recognized one action or behavior is manifested of one solo function. It's like INTP and ISTP shared same behaviors, but it's not. Assumed that one function work solo, then we can't never see it from outside, it's just a part of a process, like a single segment moment of thinking.

Ok, now we're getting to the interesting part. You're saying that a person's observed behavior is always the result of a "string of functions" and that individual functions cannot operate on their own. Is this accurate? Am I wrong in my interpretation? If so, it's an interesting theory. However, since you seem to have read very little about Jungian cognitive functions (you mentioned a few websites), I think you should actually read what Jung says in his book, Psychological Types. I really don't think your theory matches what he describes.

I don't disagree that adult INTPs and ISTPs may be hard to distinguish at times, but we are talking about childhood: how/when various functions appear during this time period.

Just my experience from learning the basic cognitive functions, combined with 14 personality disorders of Oldham and Ptypes of Dave Kelly. But I would trust my intuition rather than other opinions. Don't expect me that I read advanced books about MBTI. Because if we all talking about something like "truth", "correct", then it doesn't matter it is said by a regular individual or a psychologist. I just learn from most basic sites like personalitypathway or myerbriggs.

I never saw that Oldham site before so thanks for mentioning it. Looks interesting. I like the correlations between INTP and schizoid/libra/solitary, etc. Dave Kelly I have heard of and read some of his stuff.

I thank you for your ideas. I am going to start a new thread about this topic.

 

[8151147]

Ok, now we're getting to the interesting part. You're saying that a person's observed behavior is always the result of a "string of functions" and that individual functions cannot operate on their own. Is this accurate? Am I wrong in my interpretation? If so, it's an interesting theory. However, since you seem to have read very little about Jungian cognitive functions (you mentioned a few websites), I think you should actually read what Jung says in his book, Psychological Types. I really don't think your theory matches what he describes.

So you think I was wrong about cognitive functions? Just point it out from that Jung's book. If you read it why can't summarize the content, the important parts... so other can understand it simply?

I won't say it's my theory, but what I understand directly from basic concepts of cognitive functions. For example when they mention function develop strongly, actually the "Develop strongly" already contain necessary attributes or processes, like the first, the strongest, the most naturally, the frequently use...etc. If a non-Dom functions develop before the Dom, it means it also develop stronger than the Dom.

 

[Inquisitor]

So you think I was wrong about cognitive functions? Just point it out from that Jung's book. If you read it why can't summarize the content, the important parts... so other can understand it simply?

I haven't read everything yet, but what I have read suggests that behavior/thought can be the result of using individual functions independent of the dominant. Jung never says that every function must be tied to the dominant. Nevertheless, it's an interesting theory I would like to examine.

I won't say it's my theory, but what I understand directly from basic concepts of cognitive functions. For example when they mention function develop strongly, actually the "Develop strongly" already contain necessary attributes or processes, like the first, the strongest, the most naturally, the frequently use...etc. If a non-Dom functions develop before the Dom, it means it also develop stronger than the Dom.

I never should have used "develop" because it has been the cause of so much confusion for the both of us in this conversation. "Manifest" or "Appear" are better words. And no, I disagree with you that if they seem to manifest more clearly at certain times than the dom at an early age that this then means they must be "stronger" than the dominant.

 

[8151147]

And no, I disagree with you that if they seem to manifest more clearly at certain times than the dom at an early age that this then means they must be "stronger" than the dominant.

So people must be able to recognized its manifestation from outside right? That's why I said because you believe function work independent, or at least manifested independently. Assumed it work independently, it's just a part of a process and we can't see its manifestation from outside. We can't perceive it.

If it express itself independently, then can we say it's possible that at certain times, Si of an INTP is equal to Si of ISFJ? Can you make sense this part? I don't mean they can't be strong equally in term of intensity, but strong differently because of the affection from Dom function. Because they work together, and we will never ever can discern one function work solo from outside. They work together and its result is always from complex combination of all functions.

 

[Spirit]

Think of an example using driving a car

Dom- Self - all control
Aux- Spouse - great control
TERT- 15 year old - Teen driver reckless not experienced at all
Inf- Toddler - wtf

 

[dark+matters]

I was setting up an experiment in which I would infuse the properties of a lobster that cause it to stop showing signs of aging with the properties of a human that cause his or her Telomeres to shorten. I couldn't find any test subjects. I was confident about my research, so I hooked up the lobster's claws to electrodes and stepped into the transmogrification chamber myself in order to conduct the test. I set the dial to automatic. But just as the process began in earnest, I noticed a fly buzzing in the chamber with me! Our heads switched! It has ended very, very badly.

 

[ENTP lurker]

It is pretty hard distinguish perception preference over judging preference.
If you like ordered life and have somewhat structure preference over indulging possibilities new then you are judging dominant and IxTP. Introverted thinking is the most structured function there is.

Perception dominance. Well, I remember as a child about pondering existential questions. They just came to me. I didn't need probing. Every time I experienced something I went into searching it's inner potential automatically. That makes someone an ENxP. If it is systematic then it is ENTP if it is relational then it is ENFP.

Intuition for INTP is just a way to apply Ti.

 

[Inquisitor]

So people must be able to recognized its manifestation from outside right? That's why I said because you believe function work independent, or at least manifested independently. Assumed it work independently, it's just a part of a process and we can't see its manifestation from outside. We can't perceive it.

If it express itself independently, then can we say it's possible that at certain times, Si of an INTP is equal to Si of ISFJ? Can you make sense this part? I don't mean they can't be strong equally in term of intensity, but strong differently because of the affection from Dom function. Because they work together, and we will never ever can discern one function work solo from outside. They work together and its result is always from complex combination of all functions.

Si of an INTP will never be equal to that of an ISFJ. But, INTP Si might motivate certain kinds of behavior which we would not ordinarily think of as being INTP behavior. For example, I don't think drawing colorful pictures, memorizing facts in books, or play acting could be considered classical examples of what INTPs enjoy doing in their free time. Therefore, something else is motivating these behaviors since I would venture most INTPs lose interest in doing these things as they get older. I started a thread about this topic FWIW. So far only 1 response though.

 

[Jennywocky]

I'm not sure we should be so quick to exclude particular behaviors for particular individuals just because of someone's broad conjecture of "type." There's room for variance based on individual make-up and circumstance.

 

[Inquisitor]

Think of an example using driving a car

Dom- Self - all control
Aux- Spouse - great control
TERT- 15 year old - Teen driver reckless not experienced at all
Inf- Toddler - wtf

This analogy isn't bad, but in reality, all of these people are in the same car together at the same time. The Self exerts the greatest degree of control, but the spouse is an excellent navigator and advisor. The Toddler is a conniving bastard who's always threatening to cause such a distraction that the car goes into a ditch, and the 15 year old is generally well-behaved as long as the Self and Spouse seem in control of the situation. The sandwiched functions between the Spouse and 15 year old can really go either way. When you feel in control and everything seems to have clicked in your life, they are going to be pretty much neutral/positive. But if the Dom and Aux seem inadequate to the task, the sandwiched guys can be nefarious in their own right.

 

[Inquisitor]

I'm not sure we should be so quick to exclude particular behaviors for particular individuals just because of someone's broad conjecture of "type." There's room for variance based on individual make-up and circumstance.

No doubt. But I think we can say with a fair degree of confidence that there are many activities that INTPs are almost never motivated to do. When they're young though...I think that's a different situation because the brain is growing and changing at such a rapid pace. So certain types may engage in behaviors that just don't seem to mesh with you they are. I'd like to get to the bottom of why this is...

 

[8151147]

Si of an INTP will never be equal to that of an ISFJ. But, INTP Si might motivate certain kinds of behavior which we would not ordinarily think of as being INTP behavior. For example, I don't think drawing colorful pictures, memorizing facts in books, or play acting could be considered classical examples of what INTPs enjoy doing in their free time. Therefore, something else is motivating these behaviors since I would venture most INTPs lose interest in doing these things as they get older. I started a thread about this topic FWIW. So far only 1 response though.

What the. Your underlined phrase is what exactly I did when I was a child, I was even pretty good at drawing and won some prizes for kids. But it was pretty normal and not like you thought in the bold. It seem you still hadn't realized your misconception yet, that this type must has these behaviors or that type must hasn't those behaviors... If an INTP scream and destroy things around him like a psychopath doesn't mean he used Se function. From the process of cognitive functions to a behavior which can be seen is a long long complex way. Simply your biggest misconception is that bold. It's just damn normal and its the manifestation of Ti-Ne. But Ti-Ne of a child, they haven't develop fully yet.

 

[Inquisitor]

What the. Your underlined phrase is what exactly I did when I was a child, I was even pretty good at drawing and won some prizes for kids. But it was pretty normal and not like you thought in the bold. It seem you still hadn't realized your misconception yet, that this type must has these behaviors or that type must hasn't those behaviors... If an INTP scream and destroy things around him like a psychopath doesn't mean he used Se function. From the process of cognitive functions to a behavior which can be seen is a long long complex way. Simply your biggest misconception is that bold. It's just damn normal and its the manifestation of Ti-Ne. But Ti-Ne of a child, they haven't develop fully yet.

Getting tired here. Word of advice from someone who teaches English to foreigners for a living: You do not mean "misconception." That word is a little condescending. It means that I do not understand or that I am somehow confused, which is not the case here. Your opinion is that I am incorrect. You disagree with what I am saying. You and I simply have different interpretations of what a function does and how it manifests in someone's behavior. I really don't see how enjoying drawing colorful pictures is Ti-Ne in action. Makes no sense to me whatsoever. Your explanation is inadequate. The bold part sounds reasonable to me, and it is something I explored in the new thread I posted: Need input: Are the lower functions "slaved" to the dominant or are they independent?

You have your own ideas, which are not in my view based on extensive study of Jungian psychology. Nor do you seem to have decades of real-world experience applying typology. If you were an expert, I might believe your interpretation, but as you apparently have done even less reading on this topic than I have, I think we should agree to disagree. You're an interesting fellow, and I hope to have further conversations with you in the future. I have enjoyed this conversation, but at this point, I am done discussing this with you.

 

[8151147]

^
Although I agree that this subject is not kind of something that can't be supported with "evidences", thus the argument's purpose is not going to be true-false result and there are no point for digging in wrong or true... However are you serious when valuating the opinion based on "even less reading on this topic"? What kind of "logic"/"Rational" is that? How did you measure it?

And I perfectly understand the word "misconception", no wrong used here. I valuate opinion based on itself and I understood enough your meaning. Your false belief that non-Dom function develop/active/work... stronger than Dom even at certain moment was come from your misconception about cognitive functions. And this totally can be understand directly from basic concepts about MBTI we can find wherever on internet. You just hadn't understand it and you need the clarity for the important parts you didn't understand. That's simply it, no correct/incorrect but understanding.

 

[ENTP lurker]

If we look at socionics then Ni in INTP might have huge impact on your life. I know that I have flexed my Te quite a lot.

Ni and Te - while those functions are excellent at getting there and therefore good for societal acceptance it will be very demanding mentally but we are able to be succesful at using them. I started to drift away from my Te in mid twenties. It wasn't pretty to start neglecting it all together. I was studying very data heavy practical science (analytical chemistry) and felt strong inclination towards more theoretical side just before I started to work on my thesis (couldn't put my concentration together). Now I'm about to go back in university as routine measurement side of things bugs me a lot. This time it will be pure physics and mathematics.

 

[ygnextend]

Born this way. My mother said I had always been some what 'mean' or at least that what some people thought of me. Yet depending on the environment I would open up and become a kinder gentler person.

if people gave me positive or negative vibes I treated them accordingly. I never been the judgemental type just observant and if someone did too much fuckery I immediately dismissed them.

Never really realizing my awkward behavior until recent years. I m even more comfortable not conforming, not following, and being who I am. I don't apologize especially for someone else's insecurities.

I would suggest THE 48 LAWS OF POWER by Roberte Greene for INTPS. It has helped me with a lot of social things. I don't like to talk much and that book helped me with social anxiety and connecting with people even if I didn't want to. And if I don't like someone I've learned how how to push them out of my life 'gently'.

YGN

 

[DaDaMan]

One does not simply become an INTP

 

[_intp]

One does not simply become an INTP

Oh yes, it happened to me. I used to consistently test INTJ. I got profoundly depressed. Picked up philosophy and my outlook on life just changed drastically. Took the real test from psych's multiple times to determine INTP.