Constellation as the Retribution for Dismissal
We have gained understanding now of the role irrelevance plays in the differentiation of the psyche; specifically, that the base IM element arranges the remainder of the foreground element set so as to suppress the development of the background set. (a phenomenon cognitively reckoned as irrelevance) Upon further consideration, it is observable that the constellation/element displacement phenomenon which occurs in consequence to transcendent functioning itself is a means of suppressing information streams as irrelevant. This consideration takes us beyond model B to the (as yet unknown) Model C psychic substrate.
By aligning two elements of the same sign in the same function, the psychic orientation of those elements is allowed to dominate its considerations. There is tension between the orientations due to their dissimilar goals -- change impressed upon stasis can disjoint stasis' manner and conduct; stasis determined to impress itself upon changing content constricts the evolution of thought and ideas. For either orientation to effectively process information pursuant to its own goals alone, it must exclude the input of the other orientation. The transcendent function reflects personal intention to dismiss others' views as irrelevant in favor of greater apprehension of one's own beliefs and ideas.
The process of irrelevanting information is accomplished by affirming one's own views using information specific to them. This does not necessarily lead to bias because it may be that there is rationale offered by those same views arguing for the rejection of a given idea. However, this information range is itself the exclusive criterion for evaluation of the idea; anything outside this worldview will not be considered relevant. The affirmation of one's own viewpoint is conducted by percieving of the element which processes it in terms of the immediate contrary which offers it foundation. Thus for example, +Ne affirms itself by recalling +Ni moments whose content affirms the plausibility of the idea. Said phenomena occured and +Ne captures its essence... what more is there to think about?
Yet there are other views tread by different persons who paid attention to different things at the same moments, and they represent the shadow of the -Ni which has been dismissed. Let us not jump to the conclusion, however, that -Ni has completely been irrelevantized; indeed, only in that particular situation has it done such. The phrase "I'll believe it when I see it" captures the skepticism of +Ne towards events it has not witnessed even as others claim those events to contradict its own +Ni experience. Why indeed should we blame them for such? Blind faith can be misused; indeed, it is the self-same task of -Ni to irrelevantize +Ne.
-Ni can, however, still serve an albeit purified purpose elsewhere in the function order. It will be the -Ni which did not protest against +Ne which will be exalted with validation against the ideas of the many. This self-same -Ni will oust the experiences attested to by others one by one, to the degree that they are dissimilar from the +Ni held as testament to +Ne. This is the defining conflict of constellation: the ignored viewpoints feel themselves unfairly slighted, and seek to impress themselves against the self-validated personality. As previously discussed, change and stasis can walk contrary paths if unreconciled. There is need for a filter -- a standard -- by which to discriminate between information relevant and unrelevant to a goal, and it does indeed seem that this age-old dichotomy is the standard by which the filtration is conducted. The idea of a new self-consciousness, or of the need for a new techology, finds validation in experiences wherein the existing self-consciousness or technological norm was lacking to the demands encountered. The given historical interpretation of an event asserted by belief, however, might well frame the event as having been problematic not because either was lacking, but because at other junctures before hand the existing standard for either was not adhered to closely enough, instead distracted by preponderances of its inadequacy. So does the role of extremism -- that confusion of the objective with the subjective -- play its hand in the importance of the transcendent function. The transcendent function exists for just that purpose: to validate that which is important for oneself to understand against that which would masquerade subjectivity as objectivity. Were these ideas not recognized for the abberation that they are, they might well lead oneself -- and society -- fatally astray.