- Type: NeTi
- Development: ll--
- Attitude: Adaptive
I’ve thought about this before and I do think that functions with the same orientation do seem to blend together. We use Ji to make sense of our Pi worldview and we use Pe to take in new info that our Je needs to take action, so they work together quite seamlessly. I can see how someone that is doubly extroverted/introverted might mistype themselves if they don’t recognize the orientation of a supporting function. There’s a guy on Youtube with a channel called Cognitive Personality Theory who talks about what he calls the “convergent stack” and “divergent stack”. He claims that the convergent auxiliary (so for SeTi that would be Fe) is actually closer to a true “auxiliary” in the sense that it supports the dominant function, whereas the divergent auxiliary serves to balance out the subject. I think there’s definitely some truth to this but it depends on the development level of the person.
It’s interesting that a.k.aJanie disagrees with Auburn’s typing of her perceiving axis because I also believe I’ve been mistyped in that way. My inner world is very abstract. If you ask me to give you a concrete example from my life of a certain concept, I usually either have to look around in the concrete outer world to find something that matches the concept or fabricate an example using my concepts. Concrete experiences seem inaccessible and I don’t naturally produce a lot of associations or brainstorm. I don’t often do parody and even when I do attempt it the delivery falls flat because I don’t have a concrete impression to base it on. I’m not sure why my vultology seems to match the Ne-Si axis when my psychology clearly doesn’t, but I’m hopeful that these things will be worked out with time.