Just wanted to start a discussion on function blending. Details in the video below.
Dang Danny! You are so well spoken!!! Its like reading something auburn wrote! So eloquent. Very easy to understand what you are saying.
i actually was surprised when my sister, typed as an SeFi was not a NeFi!
Also Danny! Auburn says something along the lines of this being an open system or something like that. If you post a video you can get clarification from members on the forum on how they see your vultology. It would be cool to see you in action so to speak. You speak so well it makes me think Fe is conscious.
but! I definitely dont understand this system in its totality. And i always try to come to a complete and thorough understanding before utilizing something, although i like making new discoveries too... so the dilemma! Lol
Welcome @danny. For what it's worth what you describe is consistent with the Ne/Si axis, indeed the feeling that "concrete experiences seem inaccessible" seems to be more of an Ne thing, where Ni users would still retain a baseline level of contact with raw sensation. But you should stick around and if you have been mistyped, I'm sure it will come up. You are also welcome to join the discord, where members are quite happy to give you their opinion on your type.
Thanks @GreenCoyote! I've been studying typology pretty obsessively for a while. I'm pretty sure the eloquence you mention is mostly limited to the written word but you can be the judge of that. I'll post a video soon to get everyone's input. I'm still waiting on a response from Auburn to my e-mail.
@Faeruss What I meant is that concrete details of long-past experiences seems mostly inaccessible unless my memory is jarred by some stimulus, while the raw sensations of the present moment are available to me, albeit requiring me to shift my attention away from the non-present. This doesn't jive with my understanding of Ne-Si, since Ne relies on past episodes to produce an abstraction that explains the present experience. Those episodes may be lower in resolution than Se data but they are still more concrete than Ni concepts. Anyway thanks for the welcome and I'm sure it will be worked out.
@greencoyote, I feel this too. I feel like my Ne thoughts are often tracings of would-be (could-be, and will-be) Te. It does seem the introverted and extroverted functions of the same orientation work to cover the same territory. My Ne speculates how things work, and Te actualizes and manifests it. The former is primal - the hunter-gatherer - and the latter is a boring agriculturalist, living in a civilized world, ensuring results. I am very intrigued with how the functions are structured with respect to one another - how they're embedded, what subordinates to what, how they work with (and against!) one another, etc.
@Danny, I'll have to check that out. I could hear what he has to say. Also, I just need to observe more closely how it happens in real life.
(Also, for Danny)
Secondly, nothing in this suggests Se/Ni to me:
"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."
Inner world =/= Introverted functions. However, having an abstract internal inner world is very helpful in assisting Ne with spatial and mental transformations, manipulation of data. It may not feel like brainstorming. None of the Ne leads here relate to brainstorming. Perhaps it's a bit of a fish in water thing. In any case the generating ideas part isn't intentional; it just happens.
Lack of concrete impression is what gives Ne its parody-like quality (as the term "parody" is used by Auburn) opposed to say, Se, which copies things more exactly. My husband is NiTe, and he does tons of parodies, but CT would more likely call them "impersonations," as they're more calculated. His body never leaves his skin. He's fully in it. It's difficult and uncomfortable for me to explain this phenomena, but when I parody something, I kind of detach from the audience and my own skin. Though part of this is my shy Fi, and I think strong, secure Fe would mitigate this some for NeTi. When Fe leaves the body, it's to attach itself to The Whole, the audience. When Ne leaves the body, it's to be a speculator.
Edit: I cannot figure out how to close the "read more" tag so my side note isn't derailing.
Oh, I'm being talked about here lol.
"Janie" is fine, yes. 🙂 Regarding my typing, I would say it's more like, I was taken completely by surprise, and need time to come to terms with being a different type than the one I have consistently identified and tested as for a few years straight. By this point, I am leaning towards, Auburn's assessment was correct. (It does say margin of error with FiNe, though, too.) And I just didn't know. I actually find that kind of beautiful. I've seen it happen to one or two other people I knew from online, as well.
Also, @danny, you do seem to have a really good handle on this subject. And I actually think that Ni as a "true auxiliary", used in support of--or blends with--the dominant function, when I stay in my inner world, resonates more for me for that, than does Si.
So does a piece I read about the ISFP's "dream world", which consists of introverted functions, being more abstract, intangible, and flighty, than the INFP's, because it is perceived through a blurred, imaginative lens (Fi-Ni).
@Tea can you explain what you mean by "Inner world =/= Introverted functions"? Is our inner world not the resulting structure of our introverted functions? It's interesting that you say that the Ne leads here don't relate to brainstorming. I guess maybe that's a case of bad function descriptions that have been perpetuated in the typology community. How would you describe your experience of Ne?
some of the confusion will come from trying to compare CT to other typological systems. CT is definitely its own thing. The functions will be described differently here than you will find anywhere else.
for example Fe can kind of be a brutal function when its directive.
yeah, thats exactly what i am talking about. I liked your metaphor. It really put what im talking about into perspective.
also, i do imitations all the time. Se lets you copy mannerisms pretty easily. But your right i wouldn't consider them parodies, more like acting skills. And acting is one way i channel my Se. My dad does Ne parodies and i would say they are more like characters or stereotypes when he does them. Id also say not every Ne user probably does them too.
@GreenCoyote yeah I realized that about Fe when I understood that Jordan Peterson and CS Joseph have dominant Fe 😛. They definitely don't fit the typical Fe descriptions but it makes total sense once you realize what directive Fe is. I get that the function descriptions in CT are different, that's what drew me to it in the first place. There is so much crap out there in the MBTI world it can get really frustrating. I like the Objective Personality System too but they have like zero theoretical depth which drives me crazy. I still think that how Auburn describes Ne doesn't really fit me and my partner agrees, but I guess we'll see.
Interestingly enough I really relate to a lot of the Ne descriptions on here. I also relate a little bit to the Se descriptions as well, but it is a mixed bag for both.
I think if you share a video with the group more people will be able to check out what's going on. CT is a system of visual cues first and foremost.
Even auburn mentions that what the functions represent for each of the signals is still a work in progress.
Did your partner get a report done as well? What was his type according to CT?
@GreenCoyote yeah I'm not too concerned about it at this point. It does seem clear to me that there's a correlation between vultology and the functions but there's still some finer tuning needed to be done. It's pretty exciting to be a part of that effort. My partner hasn't been typed in CT but I'm pretty sure he's TiNe. Part of the reason I'm not sold on me using Ne is because I see a big difference in the way we perceive things. He matches the description of Ne-Si users much more.
Also, sorry I sort of hi-jacked your thread.
@danny, that's exactly it: A myth that has been perpetuated. But from the outside it may look like brainstorming since we qualify a lot of our speculations with "What if...." But our speculations tend to be how things may work rather than possible ideas for a course. The plural ideas for a course of action happens without invitation. Convergence insufficiency may be a good way to explain it.
Regarding function orientation and internal/external world, @animal has some great points on this, based on her first hand experience. Namely that Pe leads can have a vast internal world, so internal experience is not merely a property of introverted orientation. Both Pi and Pe take in information. A person always has a relationship with an object (whether that object be concrete, a process, etc.), but it's the place from which you evaluate the object that decides whether or not a person is object-oriented (extroverted) or subject-oriented (introverted).
Man, how do I describe my experience of Ne? I'm more subdued than many Pe leads because I also have Pi conscious. Ne in me can be the eternal optimist. It can also see nothing but trouble in any direction if I'm in an unhealthy state. It also makes branching and lateral inductive leaps. But that's too theoretical. Hmm, in real time it looks responding to the immediate environment (physical or mental, remember!) without direct affect. I think that's the best way to put it: Ne doesn't take direct environmental hits but maintains a distance (which is actually one definition of "abstract."). So we look a bit improper, like things aren't quite penetrating.
@teatime ok I think I mostly get your point about Pe leads having a vast inner world. Your Ne ideation is taking place within your mind/imagination so it seems internal although it's evaluating objects rather than the objects' relation to the subject, thus it's extraverted. That makes sense. I would say that I'm generally not very attentive to my physical environment, I'm usually "in my head", but what seems to be going on when I do this is not an exploration of many contingencies or speculation of how things might work but rather trying to narrow in on the "best fit" concept. I'm either anticipating some future event and simulating how it will turn out, or I'm considering ideas and how they fit within the conceptual framework that guides me. When I said that I have an abstract inner world I was more referring to the store of information in my mind that is most accessible to me and that seems to have order within it. I find it easy to draw on abstract concepts whose connection to concrete somatic experiences is not very conscious, however when I do recall the concrete it tends to be in sort of photographic flashes. How I understand that the Ne-Si axis works is that Ne's extrapolation is guided by the impressions provided by Si, which may not be rich in objective detail but can at least be located within the narrative of the subject's life.
I'm curious to hear from other Ti types, but perhaps "best fit" is a good description of how Ne + Ti might work. I kind of manipulate ideas spatially, but you seem to be talking about slotting them into categories (more Ji). I feel like we should've made a split thread... Where is Auburn to do that? lol
I like that you used the word "may" when talking about Si. Some things I possess a very nuanced, rich map for, but it just takes time to internalize, I think. Other things are completely fuzzy. And sometimes my memory of things is embellished (layers of harmony in a song that were never there).
@greencoyote, we need some kind of cheesy adage for this:
"Functions that trend together blend together."
"Functions that orient together..." (nothing rhymes with "orient") hahah
those are too good lol
functions that trend together blend together.