So I recently got my vultology report and here is some response.
Sometimes it makes sense to me, sometimes not. And it is to early for me to judge, as I havent even read the whole book yet, I think I need more time before being able to agree or disagree with the categorization.
I was not surprised by being typed as Ti-lead. That was my own guess too. N (e or i) I have always felt sure about (and also the Jungian teachers at my local Jungian institute). But Si I have never ever considered!
Unfortunately there are no examples of TiNe-Si (Iguess this is another way to spell this type?*) that I can look at in the archive, and therefore no detailed description, but today I looked at the FiNe which was described as being very close to TiNe in vultology and there I found a FiNe-Si and it said:
Si adds a “settledness” to the energy. The look of confusion is replaced with one of “knowing” and an aged maturity. Conscious Si keeps the Ji poise but takes away the reviser energy to some degree. The vultology appears calm, collected and forward facing, rather than child-like and ephemeral. Compared to the above FiNe’s Ingrid seems like more of an “adult” or a mother, and this is because of senex energy.
So I guess this would go for TiNe-Si also.
When I read the book and saw the pictures of Si it reminded me of how I can look if I get a glimpse of myself in a mirror while speaking on the phone . And several girl friends have commented on me getting a scowl, even though I tried not to.
But the psychology of Si I cannot identify myself with. I have commented on some quotes from the book beneath:
” …lives and views life through narratives; understanding how things are connected through a chain of past events”
On the contrary, this is something I tend NOT to do, I rather want to skip the presentation of my own background (and others) and I often forget about other peoples backgrounds. I tend to remember things as fragments and my friends often tie them together for me.
“They may be elated to learn that their great great grandfather was a duke or king, and may voyage on an ancestral quest driven by a search of identity; an answer to “who am I?” ”
I know people like that and have always felt different from them, I have a very shallow memory of what I have been told about my ancestors, If people start of explaining their story and ask me about mine as a way to make us know each other, my mind is busy trying to find a gateway out of it. I am shamefully aware of my lack of ability to present how I became what I am today, something that most people can do fluently.
“…stumbles into subjects such as world events, geography and anthropology in an effort to understand “what is this place, really?” ”
Which makes me think of early schooldays where I found it SO hard to foster any interest for these subjects. I had to make a strong effort to teach myself the basics later on in life. I didnt even know the history of my own country. Now I know as much, or little, as most people, but I would certainly not say its one of my big skills.
“…a vast mental archive of details. A few Si users may find themselves able to mention what they were doing four weeks ago on a Tuesday afternoon. Others may not have their talent fixed in chronological time, but be able to recite the names of all the past presidents, all the states or the actresses in old films”.
I have a bad memory, but besides this I do not have the desire to be an encyclopedia.
I just want the headlines, a synthesis, I have little interest in the exact time and place something happened. Names I am quick to forget. I cant remember which countries Napoleon conquered, but I am interested in him as an archetype, as an extreme example of something that can be found at any time, in any culture. I have no idea what I did last tuesday, the past tend to slip out of my memory, not only because I have a bad memory. I tend to remember by recalling the feeling tone of the time, then perhaps the concrete event takes form in my mind. If I dont have assess to my feelings because I feel insecure and struggle to keep cool, I am quite unable to remember what happened in the past.
“Collecting coins, vintage records, bugs and the like may be favorite hobbies of an Si user. Having “the full collection” of a thing brings a special level of satisfaction.”
I am so much not a collector. I can easily swap a favorite vintage record for something new interesting. And ”the full collection” I couldnt care less about.
One thing I can identify with is Si´s tendency to caution and skepticism, and also the nostalgia, which might sound contradictory to what I have written but I think it is another kind of nostalgia. Its not about the concrete details, but the moods, the atmosphere, what it signified.
If I then should make a turn and see how it could fit, then it is true that I during the last decades have integrated more of these qualities that I tended to ignore. For good or bad. I have looked at this as age related ( I have turned 60), but some of my old Ne-friends are still hanging on to naive hippie ideas, and I cannot help but to attack them with facts, reality, science, logic…and history.
Another thing is that although I can strongly identify with Ti, I can also identify with Fi. But I read somewhere on the website that Fe can show up as something similar to Fi in TiNe. …But still, I find I have much more Fi than most people, Same goes for Ni. Actually I initially tended to think that I was TiNi or FiNi and tried to figure out how that could fit into one of the types. I could write a lot about this too, but this is enough for now.
*) I am unsure if TiNe-Si means that Si has ”replaced” Ne, where as TiNe I-I- just means that Si is conscious, but not at the expense of Ne
- Type: TiNe
- Development: ll-l
- F Attitude: Adaptive
I am unsure if TiNe-Si means that Si has ”replaced” Ne, where as TiNe I-I- just means that Si is conscious, but not at the expense of Ne
Right! It’s the latter. TiNe with developed Si.
How do you relate to Ne? 🙂
Also, this might be interesting:
A relevant article on distinguishing “function compounds”
In the CT model, it’s not considered possible to have both Ti and Fi, or Ni + Si, and what appears to be both in a person is a mixing of energies. So a TiNe’s “FI” is an effect of Ti+Fe, but never copying the computation of Fi itself. The behavioral profiles on this site are approximated emergent properties (the end-effects) but those can sometimes be generated by a combo of other functions. This is a bit different than other models who allow for 8 functions.
Since we have so few TiNe l-l- samples, we don’t yet know the implications of it. One guess is that having Si conscious but under Ne may give a pseudo-NI quality, mimicking the effects at one level, while lacking the metabolic processing. But this is part of what we wish to uncover with our new members so your thoughts are very valuable. How would you characterize your experience of Ni?AuxParticipant
- Type: FiNe
- Development: ll--
- F Attitude: Seelie
Hi sekundaer, thanks for sharing some interesting thoughts.
I’m an FiNe, and though I don’t relate to all you have written, there are passages I felt complete resonance with. I haven’t quite figured out if I have a complete Si aversion; if I am indeed productively using it, it is useful for mapping the terrain of special interests, but in matters of the self, it’s like kryptonite!
I doesn’t have a personal history or associations with the specific, I doesn’t remember what she did yesterday but I happily direct an eye for causal relatedness to those things that interest me, and collect information about them.
“…I rather want to skip the presentation of my own background (and others) and I often forget about other peoples backgrounds. I tend to remember things as fragments…”
Absolutely! Attending to personal backgrounds is mental drudgery. Memories are anything but chronological… they’re an assortment of fragments that end up washed on the beach of any particular day, and I find them with the kind of wonder that any beachcomber would feel. Are they mine; related to me? No. They belong to experience in the abstract and time in the eternal moment. Are they valuable, endearing? Yes, they can be, but only in this depersonalised form, in which they become reinvented as the iconography of the art of the work of living: the abstract essence of a life… of being. They therefore belong to all persons, not merely to me.
I wonder if Si is a threat in circumstances where the self is devoid of a sense of secure attachment? In which case the early betrayal of trust during formative years has left a hallmark scar in psyches for whom this function would otherwise flow with some ease. It’s an interesting question.
Auburn: What I wondered was if e.g. TiNe I-I- is the same as TiNe-Si ?
I have seen in the old forum that some members are typed as say FeNi-Se,I-II which indicates that it might not be the same. and I wonder if this should be read as conscious Se and Ti PLUS dominated more by Se than Ni?
Before I discovered CT I looked into Dave Powers who use the term “jumpers” for types that has “jumped over” their 2nd function and use their 3rd function instead, which then makes them either double extroverts or double introverts. Would “-Se” signify such ‘jumping’? Would I-II? (your earlier answer seems to suggest a no to this) Or would neither?
I have to think more before I answer how I experience Ne and which traits I thought of as Ni before I can say something meaningful about it.
Aux: Very inspiring response about Si. I enjoyed the image of memories as an assortment of fragments that end up washed on the beach of any particular day, so much that when after reading it I finally laid down that evening to relax I experienced every thought that came up like driftwood. Its interesting to see how you think of memories as impersonal. This is what I somehow is trying to practice when meditating and it can help with artistic articulation like yours. I guess that the “I” vs “she” distinction refers to you as consciousness and “she” as the content of consciousness i.e. the personal history and memories.
I am still in the proces of getting a grasp on the functions, but I get that Si might among other things might be about being grounded in that part of reality that has to do with time and place and maybe other measurable or tangible qualities. And yes, it could make sense that the rejection of Si is a sort of escape into a state of not taking fully part in relating to the more mundane part of life. I guess that I to a certain degree has taken Jesus words about being in this world but not of it, as being of this world but not in it 😉
- Type: TiNe
- Development: ll-l
- F Attitude: Adaptive
There has been some open debate as to what the nature of hierarchy is. But as far as I can tell, Ti-Ne-Si-Fe is actually correct for the TiNe in all cases. In other words, there appears to be a significance in the categories:
Where the position of the auxiliary is always what it is, whether or not a person has developed a function (or two functions) below it. So for example an FeNi l-l- will still have a certain auxiliary Ni psychic relationship that never goes away. And it informs their psychology in the form of being conductor-Ni, in service of Fe. Each function plays a specific role in each type’s hierarchy.
So a TiNe l-l- like you would, as far as I can tell, still have auxiliary Ne, not auxiliary Si. Si doesn’t jump over Ne; Ne remains in its appropriate position, but Si is more developed, perhaps due to necessity or life circumstances.
Before (with the 64 subtypes model) this wasn’t the held position. And it seemed that TiSi was a ‘type’ but in reality, I think every TiSi is actually a TiNe who has grown into Si. I don’t think there’s such a thing as a person who is born as TiSi. Or born as FeSe,etc.
This is a challenging thing to prove, but recently in my discussions with @faeruss – I believe a few things were brought to light about the inescapable energetic difference that can be tracked when a person is using lower functions. And this confirms that they’re indeed lower.
I’ve also gotten verification of this from l-ll @hrafn , @meta , and a few other members who have an unconscious auxiliary function, and yet see the metabolic priority that said function’s placement has on them, despite it being less strong.EpicKalypzeParticipant
- Type: SeTi
- Development: ll-l
- F Attitude: Directive
It seem like Auburn cleared up the really important stuff pretty well especially TiNe l-l-. However, you may still be in the air about TiNe-Si. Lucky for you I have a fascination for the ego-fixation, which maybe unhealthy. So if you wish you can had over here… http://cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/dominant-function-as-undervalued/… scroll down to the 10th reply and you will find my first reply. If your replies in this thread where in that linked thread I’d would have said the following:
As TiNe-Fe: You’d be a Compass of the Fe realm of conscientiousness. In short Ji of the Fe realm. In a nutshell TiNe brain with a Fe mind.
Right now I am wondering weather or not I’d rephrase it to … TiNe l-l- brain with a Fe&Ne mind. Adding l-l- might be kept, but adding &Ne not sure. As of recently it seem like we’re left to determining our own ego fixation without aid of visual objectification. Yet I feel like this part of CT is the most alluring of our innermost desires inviting basis and inaccuracy. So if you choose to choose… do so with massive skepticism. DONE!
You can set your chosen ego on your profile like this:
On an added note… check it:
- This reply was modified 3 days, 13 hours ago by EpicKalypze.
I actually liked the idea that one could be a double extrovert or double introvert, like a “true” extrovert/introvert. This was something that made sense to me, since I can think of many extroverted people where its hard to notice any use of an introverted function and vice versa, but still most people seem to be at a balance point between extroversion and introversion. Suddenly typology began to fit into a bell curve as far as E/I is concerned.
I also find the idea of development level interesting, but would like to have both! 🙂 The first time I saw the term, I was a little bit concerned about it, I considered it must mean a measure of how developed a person is. Then I read somewhere that this is not the case, then later that it seems to imply this..at least to some degree. And yes, I know that Jung looked at individuation this way. I can see that there is/has been some speculation about this being the case. That maybe I— could mean a highly developed, specialized dominant function, where as IIII could imply that some drive is lost. I would agree that not all development is about balance. For example J can be judgmental/black&white as opposed to having wise judgment. I guess it was Freud who made the analogy with an army that have to leave some troops behind when advancing, this is development but out of balance.
The idea that one can choose a favorite function, a chosen ego, seems plausible to me. I guess such ego fixation could also be implanted by family or picked up from the environment, for example among some ‘spiritual’ people which spirituality actually is more about fellowship, getting approval or feeling secure.
When I read the thread you suggested, EpicKalypze, I came to think of a book I once read, since people were mentioning having values that were contrary to their type. The author suggest that motivation comes for some extra-typological source. I am not sure if there is any value to it, I found the idea interesting, but it blurred the picture so much to have yet another layer of typology on top of the functions, as if there is not enough confusion already. But there might be something to pick up from it. (also its interesting to read how Jung at first considered feeling as extrovert and thinking as introvert. That this simple dichotomy was how it all started….)
Here is a little extract:
My typology makes use of four of these archetypes: Power, Eros, Spirit and Matter. I define Power
as an urge for domination and control; Eros as concern with relations and connections, and not only among people; Spirit as a fascination with the realm of art, fantasy and ideas; and Matter as interest in physical objects and the natural world…By adding these four fundamental dynamics that provide the energy and a sense of direction for conscious functioning, archetypalmotivational typology deepens and completes Jung’s typology. The combination of the two allows for a more dimensional grasp of personality than an assessment based on conscious preferences alone. For example, knowing someone is an introverted thinking sensation type does not disclose the motivational style or area of interest to which these functions are devoted. Archetypal- motivational typology, on the other hand, may reveal that the introversion, thinking and sensation are used in the pursuit of power.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.