1. Why do you seem to operate on the asusmption that the auxiliary will always be clelarly differentiated? 2. Why do you assume the auxiliary must always be of the opposite function attitude regardless of whether what function is ego conscious and thus does not fit your type schema, e.g. Ni Ti Fe Se as opposed to Ni Fe Ti Se as an example? 3. Is there any reason you consider the auxiliary relevant at all when it comes to separating people into type as opposed to simply reduce it to 8 types as is done in Jung's original model?
1. Will be answered via 2 & 3. 2. I actually don't strictly believe that... The way the structure of this theory goes, from strongest axioms to finer ones is like this:
Principle One: Perception <-> Judgment // a person is either Perception-Lead or Judgment-Lead ||| J-type, P-type Oscillation A: However, Perception cycles with Judgment (a consciousness requires a data absorbing process and a decision-making process) J+P type, P+J type Oscillation B: Moreover, within both each Perception & Judgment exists another oscillation due to the direction of energy-flow. | Ji-Je, Pi-Pe Oscillation C: The energy-flows of one wheel connects with the energy-flows of the other, respective to I & E, to create two more cycles. | Ji-Pe, Pi-Pe
The relative predominance of one process over another is a much less consistent signal (albeit still valid) than the predominance of the Perception-wheel over the Judgment-wheel. Let me try to explain this way:
One set of oscillations (whether perception or judgment) is dominant While a second set of oscillations (of the other type) is subordinate.*
An NiFe and an SeTi have the least difference, psychologically, since they're both Ni/Se > Fe/Ti. They both lead their psyche via a holistic approach in perception synthesis of Ni/Se, and the flowing with those sensations, while using judgment of the Fe/Ti secondarily (not main agenda) to aide in the flowing of those perceptions toward desired visceral outcomes. However, Ni inactivity will oscillate into Fe's activity, and Se's activity will oscillate with Ti's inactivity as a general rule. I've actually witnessed a couple people who are exceptions to this, but not so many that I can say with certainty this principle is flawed; where the data instead supports the hypothesis that those few I don't comprehend properly.
3. Is there any reason you consider the auxiliary relevant at all when it comes to separating people into type as opposed to simply reduce it to 8 types as is done in Jung's original model?
This theory is indeed based on Jung, but it isn't exactly like Jung's. In this theory it is not conceivable to be without the principle of the necessity for perception and judgment. Judgment is useless if it has no data from which to discriminate, and likewise Perception leads nowhere without a means to apply that data. I also work in A.I. and know it's not possible to not have these two and create anything remotely resembling consciousness.
And so it's not a question of whether we can say there are 8 types, 4 of which use perception and 4 of which use judgment. We cannot, because all must use both. It's instead a matter of which processes of those 8 are in use.
In this sense CognitiveType differs greatly from Jung, because in not highlighting the necessity for the cooperation between both, Jung missed several key principles. Per example, Jung did see the contrast between the Dominant and Inferior process as a central theme in the psyche: specifically in the sense that the inferior was endlessly antagonistic and destructive to the dominant -- but he didn't comprehend that the same antagonistic relationship that exists between the dominant and polar process exists to a lesser degree between the 'auxiliary' and 'tertiary' processes (or 'sub-dominant, and 'sub-polar'). I really find it quite odd that this connection wasn't made considering he did clearly believe that a function required the counterbalance.
By Jung's logic, should an individual be predominated by introverted thinking, he'd have extroverted feeling suppressed. But he didn't connect that if an individual had supportive('secondary-type') extroverted intuition, that that extroverted intuition would require a counter-balancing introverted sensing. And it's not just that it needs the counterbalance, but it is a requirement of the function of both. Ne isn't complete without Si as the two are formed simultaneously from the same broken symmetry, like shadow and light.
~~
Having clarified the necessity for the four processes, and going back to the hierarchical order for a moment. It's a possibility for an Ni-Ti-Fe-Se type to exist but from my experience the vast majority follow the pattern that the second process is complimentary (in I/E) to the first. I don't find it impossible for a type to be Ni-Ti-Fe-Se, as I don't see hierarchy as a 1-2-3-4 list, but as two pairs: in which saying Ni(TiFe)Se [TiFe inside of NiSe] versus Ni(FeTi)Se is nearly saying the same thing, perhaps only suggestive of more preferred use of Ti than Fe, but the net result would still be nearly identical both psychologically and visually.
TL;DR version: 1. The dominant process, whether P or J, requires a J or P process - respectively - to operate/create a feedback loop. 2. The dominant process also requires its polar process in order to operate (or rather, it births it by its own existence). 3. The secondary process also requires its polar process in order to operate. 4. Each pair of dom-polar has a direction of energy flow (proactive->reactive) which directs the oscillation. 5. This energy-flow also synchs across the two wheels to form Ji-Pe and Je-Pi cycles.
I hope this clears up some stuff. ^^ If you (or any other member) have more questions I'll be glad to answer. It seems to be helping me, to practice explaining this.
* If you notice the celtic knots that represent the types, there is the least difference between the types that are reflections of each other, such as TiNe and FeSi. This was deliberate, as the psyche essentially operates the same way, but in the opposite direction.
Thanks for the reply. I understand your reasoning although I am not sure I agree with that a psyche must be unstable if it does not necessarily vacillate between introversion-extroversion as your model describes, at least when it comes to the relationship between dominant-auxiliary. This is obviously based on my personal studies of people and how they come across, especially with regards to the auxiliary which when undifferentiated doesn't seem to really support either introversion nor extroversion in some cases.
Similarly, wouldn't for example a judging dominant with undifferentiated auxiliary be able to vacillate between Ne-Si and Se-Ni in an equal sense? Must there always be a clear preference? I notice this myself with my perception where I have a preference towards Ne-Si but I think based on how I understand your VR patterns, you would probably peg me more as an Fi-Se type, which seems strange to me since I'm far more ego conscious of intuition than sensation. If my Ego construct is Fi-N, one would thus propose that it makes more sense of speak of Fi-N-S-Te? Also, similarly, assuming the fluidity of your model, shouldn't the "function circles" as laid out in your chart also be able to rotate, thus creating cognitive combinations that would not always result in the type profile you posit?
The middle two processes generally are more difficult to tell apart than the two at the edges, from my experience. There is less psychic tension between the center two (whereas the dom and polar have strong tension which creates forceful spin) so for a Ji-lead like you, and like me, we utilize both 'N' and 'S' fairly easily since the information they hand over to the judgment-wheel to calculate is a merging of both.
But see, what if your intuition is Ni? ...what if you'd better class as FiNi (rather than FiNe or FiSe, should we take that approach).
I think it wouldn't be right to just leave it at Fi-N, because the reality is there are Ni-leads and Ne-leads and their existence testifies that there is a strong difference between the two, and one never is just "N" dom, just as you're not just "F" dom. But perhaps the most convincing argument I can give is that we can observe it. A TiNe will literally show the Ti-Fe cycle as well as the very same Ne-Si cycle which an NeTi shows as their primary. And the NeTi shows the Ti-Fe cycle as their secondary. This is something that I, personally, can't help but see. So I can't type someone as Ti-N, when I see Ne in them near identical to how it appears in Ne-leads, and their mind follows the same Ne rhythm of information gathering. It's an interconnected tapestry.
Also, and not claiming you are Se, but this theory, if it takes off, will clean the name of all 'S' types and truly show their brilliance because it isn't biased in any way. It acknowledges the reality that brilliance comes from the combined use of both parts of an oscillation. Which means the most admirable individuals are those who keenly spin both N & S to create simultaneously realistic and conceptually true ideas, as well as have judgments that are simultaneously logically correct and ethically ideal. The use of exclusively one side of either causes erroneous and incomplete answers.
Also, and not claiming you are Se, but this theory, if it takes off, will clean the name of all 'S' types and truly show their brilliance because it isn't biased in any way. It acknowledges the reality that brilliance comes from the combined use of both parts of an oscillation. Which means the most admirable individuals are those who keenly spin both N & S to create simultaneously realistic and conceptually true ideas, as well as have judgments that are simultaneously logically correct and ethically ideal. The use of exclusively one side of either causes erroneous and incomplete answers.
**Starts slow clap**
By the way, I noticed you're taking a break from the videos. You're not going to stop making them right?
The middle two processes generally are more difficult to tell apart than the two at the edges, from my experience. There is less psychic tension between the center two (whereas the dom and polar have strong tension which creates forceful spin) so for a Ji-lead like you, and like me, we utilize both 'N' and 'S' fairly easily since the information they hand over to the judgment-wheel to calculate is a merging of both.
But see, what if your intuition is Ni? ...what if you'd better class as FiNi (rather than FiNe or FiSe, should we take that approach).
I think it wouldn't be right to just leave it at Fi-N, because the reality is there are Ni-leads and Ne-leads and their existence testifies that there is a strong difference between the two, and one never is just "N" dom, just as you're not just "F" dom. But perhaps the most convincing argument I can give is that we can observe it. A TiNe will literally show the Ti-Fe cycle as well as the very same Ne-Si cycle which an NeTi shows as their primary. And the NeTi shows the Ti-Fe cycle as their secondary. This is something that I, personally, can't help but see. So I can't type someone as Ti-N, when I see Ne in them near identical to how it appears in Ne-leads, and their mind follows the same Ne rhythm of information gathering. It's an interconnected tapestry.
Also, and not claiming you are Se, but this theory, if it takes off, will clean the name of all 'S' types and truly show their brilliance because it isn't biased in any way. It acknowledges the reality that brilliance comes from the combined use of both parts of an oscillation. Which means the most admirable individuals are those who keenly spin both N & S to create simultaneously realistic and conceptually true ideas, as well as have judgments that are simultaneously logically correct and ethically ideal. The use of exclusively one side of either causes erroneous and incomplete answers.
I see what you are saying although unless you and I have a different way of understanding Ni and Ne respectively, I really doubt my preference lies towards Ni after hanging out with several Ni doms and it is quite clear our intuitive perception does not really work the same way. Most importantly though, our sensation does not work the same way. I have mostly been studying how you map Ne in the TiNe video because it's the only good example you got (of yourself specifically, and the eye-movements when you are silent and thinking), but what bothers me somewhat in this reply is perhaps why you seem to assume that the cognitive type style pattern of the auxiliary should follow that of the dominant. I am not saying that the auxiliary can be hard to detect, it can, I'm very proficient at typing people in how they come across in text, but isn't this exactly the reason that it makes more sense to give focus and prevalence to the dominant and leave the auxiliary more "vague" in the type description? The pattern isn't always going to be consistent across individuals. If the pattern is clear to detect, then yes, I think it makes sense to type people this way although it still needs to be double-checked by studying their actual thinking processes, but some individuals won't exhibit clear patterns, neither in their thinking or facial expressions. This is why I brought up the issue of differentiation.
Then there's a difference saying You're an N dom and Ti-N dom. One implies an undifferentiated function attitude which can happen even in mature individuals, but why must this logic also apply to the auxiliary? I've seen perception dominant types having almost little to no auxiliary presence in their thinking, especially those pre-20 years old, suggesting they can function well without auxiliary judgement although their thinking seems to be very fluid and they have difficulties making decisions. Similarly, judging dominants can function without perception but in their case they are probably often going to arrive at immature preliminary judgements.
As for sensation and intuition types, I see what you are saying and I do like the way you described Si-Ne axis in some other thread which I can agree with. I see this in myself as well with the most tension occuring between Fi-Te and I express myself almost dominantly through Te because it's very developed.
I was mostly curious why you think a double-introverted psyche isn't possible, or double-extroverted psyche, especially since the auxiliary is by nature more fickle and I am not sure you can apply the same rigid rulest on the auxiliary as you can the dominant-inferior axis.
I definitely agree. When I can't tell it apart, I just leave it at "Ni-lead" type, etc.
I have come across one-sided people like that too. I guess the reason I don't just say their aux is undifferentiated is that I take the approach that I just can't personally differentiate it and see through the fog. It's a principle my Ti holds, that the truth of them exists independent of my personal level of understanding of them. So it's not that they don't have an aux just because I can't see it readily. And sure enough, if I spend more time with them I can usually identify their processes within a couple days at most.
Sorry about the lack of Ne at present. Some of the ones posted in the Sneak Peek thread can help though. For a clear example I'd recommend this vid of NeFi Florence Welch:
There's a closeup of her eyes and how they move at 0:17-0:20. Just pretend I have the caption, "Ne Eyes Toggling (eyes fluidly glancing, not landing heavily on any one point)" next to it.
And there's instances of the Si scowling at places like 1:10-1:14 She shows the same eyes in just about every interview of her too.
This is all so exciting and soul-feeding and all-organs-awakening! What a blessing to be alive and reading all this! #explosive-charge-endless-expansion
My Fe literally gets all puddly to be able to help share truth with someone. ^^; ....c.c And have a togetherness/mutual comprehension of it. "We all agree, and we're all learning truth, yay! <3"