Reply To: Hierarchy as Ontological Priority

Home Page Forums Cognitive Functions Hierarchy as Ontological Priority Reply To: Hierarchy as Ontological Priority

  • Type: SeFi
  • Development: l---
  • Attitude: Unseelie

Hahaha. I was reading the part about how dialogues between the arrangements of the Je+Pi and Ji+Pe functions may have been complimentary structures in nature, that they are statistically overrepresented as wedded together at the highest rate.  This was 3 months ago when I was at the lowest point in my life, taking like 7 xanax a day, snorting superfluous proportions of adderall, ecstasy, cocaine and really just rotting away from within like an old log. I read maybe a quarter and understood maybe a quarter of what I read, and that was all I really got from it.  But this is the first time in over half a decade I’ve been sober for over 6 weeks and I feel amazing. I came back today and as I was reading the part about how dialogues between the arrangements of Je+Pi and Ji+Pe functions may have been complimentary structures due to their ability to supply the requirements of each other, my dad asked me to watch my baby sister while he took care of errands.  I was thinking about how statistically the functions are most underrepresented as conscious in relation to the hierarchy, and the Conductor Reviser stuff. About halfway through, I came to the conclusion that Hierarchy is only a manifestation of how compatible the needs and values of the lead function are with the remaining 3, and that we basically have a lead function with no innate structure known as hierarchy.  For about an hour I sat there thinking I was some sort of retarded genius and I was dying with excitement at the idea of sharing the information with you guys, thinking of examples of how I could support the claims. Then dad came back, I finished the reading and I was so so disappointed lmaoooo.

Anyways I just thought I’d share that because for me it was so god damn hilarious.  And heartbreaking to learn I’m a dumbass in the midst of my ecstasy, which was funny in and of itself.  I know it’s very Te reasoning, but at present, I no longer believe that an internal structure of function hierarchy exists.  I can imagine no evidence as to why what we conceptualize as hierarchy is anything besides a manifestation of how our lead function’s goals, values and needs are provided for by the remaining 3 functions.  I can’t believe the Conductor and Revisor functions are meta structures either, for the same reason. Just my 2 cents lol.

That being said, Auburn actually discovered this entirely on his own and I’m impressed as hell that he continues to pull this type of shit off.  And the information itself is so incredibly fascinating. This is one of the most interesting things I’ve learned about typology in over a year I’m sure.  Thanks Auburn. You’re badass as hell!
<div id=”gtx-trans” style=”position: absolute; left: -35px; top: 37.8px;”>
<div class=”gtx-trans-icon”></div>

© Copyright 2012-2020 J.E. Sandoval


The content on this site is not
intended for medical advice, diagnosis,
or treatment. Always seek the advice
of your physician or other qualified
health provider with questions you
may have regarding a medical condition.
For more information visit this link.