We have two contrary types to our person, one in the background that defines the relations we observe and one in the foreground that defines the relations we infer. Each of these types has an orientation toward the development of its functions in either qualitative or quantitative terms; the competing focuses play off against each other and develop quantity proportional to quality, and quality proportional to quantity. The subject (+) aspects take positions either for change or against, and the object (-) responds by taking the opposite view. By such means does the psyche differentiate, in unavoidably biased and, frankly, tragic measure the ally from the enemy, on both personal and impersonal levels, and in so doing satisfy the demands of evolution for its existence as a response mechanism against terminal threats.

However there remains the question of what role the other half of the psychic dyad plays in Model B. (or properly, the differentiation method Model B is meant to illustrate) If all the + aspects are aligned to a particular point of view, and all the - elements are aligned to the view opposite the subject, then where do the views complementary to either come into play? The answer lies not in the aspects themselves, but to whom they serve: the aspects which they directly complement. Thus liberal +Te is complemented by progressive +Fi; theoconservative +Te is complemented by neoconservative +Fi; communitarian +Te is complemented by individualist +Fi; each of which consults its partner directly when choosing what to focus on, the only time that such considerations come into conscious awareness.

I've only recently reached these conclusions and time is needed for the consideration of their implications. As can probably be figured I'll be writing more about them (the implications) once they've been deduced.