Anon wrote: hello! so, for the longest while, i was convinced that i was an infp. but, very recently, i realised that the struggles that i was going through, the problems that were coming up repeatedly, seemed to be more indicative of ne-te loop. i didn't actually get very far with the function development guide once I'd determined myself to be an infp btw. life kinda got in the way.
anyway, this realisation prompted me to delve back into your type theory guide. for the past week or so, I've been going through it in detail with a clear mind, considering every single type as a possibility and rejecting them one by one according to the evidence I'm typing up. I'm still about midway through the inf functions in the proper procedure that I'm following, but i've skimmed that entire post and others, because there's a couple of questions that's been bugging me throughout.
I've more or less narrowed myself down to an xnfp, although like i said, I'm still open to considering other types as well. what I'm mostly stuck with is the following:
1. how is an enfp's ne-te loop going to look in contrast to an infp's te grip?
2. how is an infp's fi-si loop going to look in contrast to an enfp's si grip?
i understand that, of course, every person is a unique example of their type. but I've been stuck with these two points, since i couldn't find anything on your blog related to how a specific tert function's loop looks in tandem with the type's corresponding dom function. like, i know what te-loop looks like, but i don't know how it would work with ne dom. i suspect where i might have gone wrong with typing myself (if i was mistaken, like i said, i am still going through the theory guide intensively), was misidentifying si grip as fi-si loop.
if you do have any past posts that I've missed, I'd appreciate you redirecting me to them. and i hope my doubt is clear, and that you'll be able to help me out. thank you!
-----------------------
As far as I can tell, there are several issues to address:
1) Overemphasis on how functions "look": This usually means you're too focused on outward behavior (superficial) and not really understanding how functions operate inside the mind (fundamentals). Until you are able to draw a proper distinction between cognition and behavior (which is the first major principle that I teach in the Function Theory guide), your focus will likely be misplaced on the what and then missing the why. Asking "what does my Te look like?" won't get you as far as asking "WHY do I use Te in this way?" Basically, you're not going deep enough.
2) Not accounting for Function Dynamics: Newbies often get stuck on viewing functions in isolation, which exacerbates problem #1 above. Once your learning becomes more advanced, you'll understand that functions are dynamic and intertwined. For instance, tertiary loop and inferior grip are very different because the function interactions that produce them are very different:
- Tertiary loop arises due to a unique relationship to i) dominant dysfunction, specifically dominant immaturity, and ii) auxiliary underdevelopment, specifically auxiliary resistance. Thus, evidence of tertiary loop must also include evidence of those two issues, which I have already included in the guide under the dominant and auxiliary function sections. These three parts must fit together properly.
- Inferior grip arises due to dominant dysfunction, specifically dominant extremes that create a troubling imbalance. One reason people find themselves in dominant extremes is because they're trying to force the function to work in unsuitable ways/situations, which causes escalating problems with stress, to the point of not being able to cope and adapt well. Thus, evidence of inferior grip must include i) evidence of dominant extremes, and ii) eventual loss of healthy dominant functioning, information which is already included in the inferior function section of the guide.
3) Not accounting for Type Dynamics: Type dynamics refers to the theory of the functional stack, of how the whole is more than just the sum of its parts. Each of the four functional stack positions serves a unique and specific purpose in your psychology with regard to what the ego needs and wants, which is briefly explained in the beginning of each stack position section, as well as the type dynamics section of the Type Dev guide.
For example, the proper purpose of the tertiary function is to complement and temper the auxiliary function. However, tertiary loop means that this healthy dynamic is altered and the tertiary function is being misused for a different and more nefarious purpose of propping up a failing dominant function.
This goes back to point #1 above of not grasping the "WHY" - what is the purpose of each function in the mind? It's very important to ask yourself WHY you are using the function in that particular way, in relation to the other functions. To what end or to what purpose is the behavior meant to serve?
.
It looks like all the information you need is already included in the study guides, so perhaps you have only been picking out some superficial points about the "look" of functions and ignoring the more important theoretical concepts that would help you understand WHY functions look a particular way. The problem with not reading the guide all the way through to full understanding before you start doing the hard work of analyzing yourself is that you won't see the bigger picture of how all the parts are meant to fit together.
Psychology is complicated, so function theory isn't exactly easy to learn. There are many levels of comprehension and you're still at the beginner level. It's certainly not a crime to be a beginner, since we all have to start somewhere. However, don't sabotage yourself with poor learning methods such as disorderly/unfocused reading, taking shortcuts, or thinking that the "gist" equals complete knowledge - these are common learning obstacles for NPs.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
âś“ Live Streamingâś“ Interactive Chatâś“ Private Showsâś“ HD Qualityâś“ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Why do we sometimes act like our opposite types? (ex. ISFJ/ENTP, ISFP/ENTJ, ISTP/ENFJ, etc)
It is said that our opposite is our aspirational self, it is how we wished we were, or how we aspire to be (when healthy and mature). So thorough our inferior function... sometimes... we tend to flip the way we think and act, but is less likely to do so in a healthy way, since our inferior and tertiary functions are unconscious most of the time.
But I guess that, given the fact that we share all the functions but in different order, in some situations when we're fed up or just tired of the shit of everyone, or we just want to be self-indulgent, we act pretty differently than we usually do, and it's more likely to "adopt" an opposite personality that still shares our principal functions.
this is all my theory, tho. But I do admit I sometimes realize I have been very "INTJ-ish" sometimes so i think there's a point somewhere xd
I love it when i get a chance to really talk to my INTJ brother. We discovered a cool distinction between our types. As an INFJ, i have ALWAYS gravitated towards the backs of rooms or crowds of people. Like in a lecture hall or classroom setting I am always in the very back, as far away from the center of attention as possible. My INTJ brother has always gravitated toward the first row. He would try to get as close to the teacher or source of learning or whatever as he could. I think this is the difference between Fe/Se and Te/Se. With Se as our inferior function, we are constantly taking in information about our surroundings. We can't help it. For INFJs though, we WANT to soak in the information in front of us, we want to be able to watch what's going on. I feel very uncomfortable not knowing what's going on behind me. I can't focus on the teacher or lecture if I dont know what's going on around me. For INTJs, it seems to be the opposite. Their ultimate goal is to intake the information from the teacher or lecture, they want to pay attention to that. But since they are still painfully aware of their surroundings, they gravitate towards the front of the crowd, so they dont have to notice everything else that's going on. They focus when they try to tune out the Se. For example, my INTJ brother just finished medical school. He said in order to study and really intake everything he needed to learn, he had to sit in a library cubicle with walls and headphones so that he COULD concentrate. Me, on the other hand...for example, my big family had a reunion of sorts the last few days, the most of us we've been able to get together at once for a while. While everyone else was very much engaged in conversation, kids running around, dogs, tv going, I was intaking all this information, but completely focused on my book at the same time. At a few points, i would hear key words or phrases that made me shift my focus to the conversation, i would chime in and say my two cents completely, and then go right back to my book. I think that's because the objective of Te is to efficiently complete goals. While the objective of Fe is to meet needs. So we as INFJs become good at listening and noticint everything to make sure all needs are being met, while Te wants to tune everything out to focus their energy on the task at hand. At first i thought it would be an Ni/Se dynamic, so i thought he would share my experience in gravitating toward the back. But he was quite adamantly the opposite! I just thought that was so interesting! That's also probably where INTJs get that "nerdy" or "goody two shoes" stereotype in high school. People mistranslate the need to be focused and close to the teacher as trying to be a teacher's pet. When really, they're just trying to learn effectively.
Can a person consistently grip without looping, and loop without gripping?
Not that I’ve ever seen. According to type dynamics, the two go hand-in-hand because when one of the functions is dysfunctional enough to loop/grip, the other one will be dysfunctional as well, functions cannot be separated out and isolated like that. Part of the problem is that loop and grip behavior is not well-defined. Functions can manifest negative behavior in a variety of ways, so it depends on what you want to define as being “loop” or “grip” behavior, e.g., some people think of grip behavior as only encompassing temporary stress-induced dysfunction, whereas others may label any kind of inferior dysfunction as grip behavior.
Sometimes I differentiate between “inferior issues” versus “inferior grip”, where “issues” is not as serious and more like the everyday personality flaws that need to be addressed through self-development, and “grip” is more serious and more likely to be stress-induced. People can be in a chronic loop state that lasts for a long time, and their inferior dysfunction tends to be more subtle, not as easily identifiable as the usual grip descriptions. People can be in a chronic grip state that lasts for a long time, though they will show signs of tertiary looping as soon as they feel threatened or emotionally unstable.
ESTP here, I have been studying cognitive functions for about two years now and have read your blog extensively. It is something I think about daily and has helped me understand myself tremendously. As time has gone on I'm starting to hear the cognitive functions as a sort of internal dialogue in my head. As time has gone on I have become better at identifying and distinguishing each cognitive function within my psyche. I have begun to notice that each function produces a different kind of
[con’t: feeling or kind of energy, My first question for you is what is the hard science behind this? Could it be that each cognitive function uses different parts of the brain and emits different brain waves? Also I am having trouble truly distinguishing my introverted functions. Could two functions (that aren’t opposites) be used at the same time ? I don’t mean working off eachother in chronological order but actually in unison. Separating and identifying my internal Ti dialogue from Ni dialogue wou…]
Was there another part to your ask because that’s all I received? I wish I could answer your “hard science” question. As a casual reader of neuroscience research, my overall impression is that we have very little knowledge of how the brain actually works. There’s lots of hypothesizing/speculation but not much fact to back it up, mostly because we don’t yet have the technological tools that are required to study the brain’s immense capabilities. Scientists can barely figure out the exact mechanisms behind how we fall asleep, let alone understand something as complicated as how individuals ascribe abstract meaning to things. I think that people who aren’t very familiar with the field of neuroscience tend to overestimate how much it can actually explain about human experience. We don’t even know if consciousness is only found in the individual mind or whether everything in the universe has consciousness. It is true that certain regions of the brain are responsible for certain cognitive tasks. But it is also true that, the more complex the task, the more it requires different regions to work together across the entire brain. So, it’s not as simple as this region is for that and that region is for this. Therefore, the answer to your question about different functions using different parts that emit different waves is “yes and no”.
You’re using all four cognitive processes constantly, which is not the same as using them well. As I mentioned previously, it’s common to have difficulty separating the introverted functions. People mingle Ti with Ni/Si. The easiest way to wrap your head around it is to always start by properly distinguishing perceiving from judging functions. Judging functions want to feel confident that judgments are correct and reliable. Ti wants to be able to say with absolutely certainty that “x caused y” or “if x, then y”. Ni and Si are perceiving functions, so their job is not to make judgments but rather to gather information for making judgments. If Ti is high in your stack (TP), you make Ti judgments very reflexively, then the role of Ni or Si is to gather information to ensure that your judgment is correct. Ni will intuit/visualize the potentialities that it deems meaningful and then Ti will “judge” and pick out the one that seems most probable. (Si will gather the details that it deems existentially important and then Ti will “judge” and incorporate the details that it believes are most relevant to the mental model being built.) But if the Ti-Ni relationship is wonky, Ti will not be able to make good judgments or accurately judge the most probable outcome because Ni will be very limited and distorted in what it can intuit/visualize, probably being far too optimistic/pessimistic due to being unconsciously driven by your insecurities and underlying emotional issues. Ti will be wrong when Ni is limited and Ni will be more and more limited if Ti keeps being wrong; Ti is more likely to be right when Ni has more depth and Ni will have more and more depth if Ti is less and less quick to judge. They work seamlessly together in that sense.
This is why function descriptions are very hard to write (and I have to constantly edit them down to the smallest details) because it is actually very difficult to completely isolate a function from the rest of the stack. For example, people often say that Ni wants to feel certain about things. Yes and no. It depends on where it falls in the stack. Dominant Ni (INFJ), due to its relationship with lower Se, wants to believe that one’s abstract vision of the world is “factual”, so the judging functions (Fe-Ti) should ideally be used to sort information in order to ensure that one’s vision adapts towards greater Se factualness. However, it is more likely that an INFJ will simply twist Ti logic to justify whatever vision they deem most personally meaningful and avoid undesirable Se facts. By contrast, lower Ni (ESTP), due to its relationship with higher Se, wants to believe that there is more to the world than meets the eye, so inferior Ni should ideally interfere with the judging functions (Ti-Fe) by casting doubt and mistrust about Se, sending up unbid thoughts/ideas/feelings/images to create pause in the ESTP so as to not act rashly or make judgments too superficially. However, it is more likely that an ESTP will sense that Ni is trying to get a foot in the door just as Ti logic is about to close it, so Se will use its dominance to slam the door shut and quickly move on by claiming with certainty that “the facts are the facts, no need to overthink it”. Simple function descriptions are very limited because they can’t really account for stack position and type dynamics. I can only tell you the theoretical framework of how the ESTP stack works, I cannot describe real experiences of ESTP type dynamics because I’m not one and I’ve only observed from the outside.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
âś“ Live Streamingâś“ Interactive Chatâś“ Private Showsâś“ HD Qualityâś“ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Do you think an MBTI type is likely not to get along with the opposite type? for example ESTJ and INFP or ISFJ and ENTP? or is it senseless?
hello anon,
infj here and I get along fine with estps … never felt any major connection to any or vibed w any particularly … but then again I don’t talk to that many people soo. I know intj gets along fine w esfps but idk @intj ever had a proper esfp friend?
and thinking of the other opposite types, **ponders a little** ig it’s similar… like they can def get along but it’s unlikely for there to be particularly good chemistry. it is worth noting that one of the “ideal matches” for a type will only be one away from their opposite type,.. eg esfps and istjs and then intjs and enfps. so it’s always bound to be interesting
If people can display multiple "faces" to people, does that mean we have more than one personality type? Or do we only belong to one type?
Our Ego belongs to an only type, but our unconscious mind, also called the shadow, can take control in certain moments or situations (this is your other 4 functions, the shadow ones), while also your subconscious mind is said to be your personality lead by your inferior function, thus, your "letters" opposite but same functions in reverse order.
That's from John Beebe's theory "4 sides of the mind", in which the 4th one is the superego, the shadow of your subconscious and the latter you come at when the other three are "useless" for your purpose.
Hi! My bfs best friend is an ENFJ. I've know him for almost 3 years but we typically don't talk or hang out unless it's with my boyfriend. Well lately he's been texting me randomly to see what I'm doing & asking me deeper questions trying to motivate me towards my goals that I don't believe I'll be able to achieve. At least now right now. It's really random. I'm really shy & don't talk much unless spoken to, so do you think he's just trying to get me to open up to someone? I'm an ISFP btw.
hahahahahahahah <3
omigosh
i’m blushing
yes, that’s exactly what is going on and yes, that is such an ISFP response to an ENFJ. sigh.Â
I think he’s trying to create a connection with you because you’re important to his bff. and… the way he tries to create deep connections is to talk about goals and rando deep shit. if you told him you’re not comfortable talking about that kind of stuff he should back off. but please spare his feelings and maybe offer what you would rather talk about.
