Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Background functions

  1. #1
    Creepy-ifmd95

    Default _

    _
    Last edited by ifmd95; 04-13-2011 at 06:40 AM.

  2. #2
    Snomunegot munenori2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    TIM
    Introvert sp/sx
    Posts
    7,739
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I have no idea, but I like your avatar, ifmd.
    Moonlight will fall
    Winter will end
    Harvest will come
    Your heart will mend

  3. #3
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,937
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    Where I can find literature on their dichotomic traits and such? In particular, I am wondering precisely how strong background functions are. As I see it, there are at least three plausible interpretations:

    --Background functions all have average strength, because the corresponding club is a composition of weak and strong functional dichotomies.

    --Consider some "average strength" and "average weakness", where by that I mean the average strength/weakness of all weak and strong functions (respectively. So there are two values.) Consider the [classical] base function of the background function's "type" and whether it corresponds to strong/weak traits in the foundational dichotomies. For example, +Te ~ ESTj ~ Te base ~ "strong as a background function in INTj" (with the degree of "strength" existing somewhere between 8th and cre.) -Si would be weak in the INTj though.

    --Background function strengths correspond 1:1 with the strength of the corresponding foreground/classical functions
    If an INTj has Id block '-Te', and an ENTj has Ego block '-Te', the ENTj will have stronger '-Te' than the INTj, at least in the conscious (as opposed to subconscious) sense.

    Edit: I would think that an ESTj's Ego block '-Te' is the same strength as an INTj's Id block '-Te', in general.

  4. #4
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,937
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    An ESTj's Ego block -Te probably exists in the Ego at the expense of +Te, so if -Te is 'strong' then +Te is 'weak' in terms of the Ego block.

    I don't think you can easily justify the conscious as being weaker than the subconscious. You are aware of your Ego and SuperEgo, and your 'strengths' in these determine your weaknesses in your Id and SuperId blocks. This is what I understand to be the case.

    (Though I don't have any problem when it is said that an ESTj's Te is stronger than an INTj's Te).

  5. #5
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,937
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    But which Te? For example, are INTj as NT better at -Te than the ESTj?
    I don't know, though I'd postulate that an ESTj's Ego block +Te would be so strong as to minimise their -Te, seemigly making the INTj's -Te as being stronger than the -Te of ESTjs.

    But I don't have a laboratory where I examine people in cages - I simply haven't got the space . I don't really know how you'd examine all this satisfactorily.

  6. #6
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,937
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    The model just recognises that an ENTj's and an ESTj's Ego block Te seemingly differ, hence -Te and +Te.

    Everyone is supposed to utilise all eight functions but in different amounts and different priorities - same principle with the - and + thing. If one type has -Te in their Ego block, they have -Te in their Id block. The - and + is supposed to be short range and long range (can't remember which is which).

    Edit: You can find the supposed + and - descriptions that ifmd mentioned here.

  7. #7
    Landlord of the Dog and Duck Subteigh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    TIM
    EII-Ne Sp/So
    Posts
    14,937
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ifmd95 View Post
    But there are 16 elements assigned to each type? Unless you are considering the background and the corresponding forground together (as a pair) to be a function.
    If you consider the model useful, then that would be one way of putting it.

  8. #8
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Background functions have always puzzled me aswell.

    The best answer I could gave myself is that they have to be understood in terms of quadra-progression values. So democratic quadras always have minus sign judging function and plus sign perceiving functions, both for background and primary. Vice versa is valid for aristocratic quadras: plus sign judging function and minus sign perceiving function. (we could interchangealby use "abstract" and "concrete" as words for minus and plus, however I am not certain yet that my interpretation of these two words in a socionics context is correct).

    As far as strenght goes: strenght comes with usage. Usage is conditioned by preference (in my opinion, of course). Thus each type will always use the most the ego block.
    Now we have to deduce the frequency of usage of the background functions. Noticing how the dual of the same-temperament quadra-progression types always possesses the inverse sign function as a background, we could consider how rings of illusion serve as a means to "transcript" information.

    Let's make an example:

    ESTj Te+ base function
    INTj Te- background function

    ESTj->ESFj Te+ to Fe- base function
    ESTj->INTj Te+ to Te- background function

    concrete to abstract Te, abstract Te allowing a freer expression of abstract Fe (which is emphasized in alpha), by converting the concrete Te of Deltas (which would be an hindrance to an abstract Fe environment).

    All of this is highly specualative and perhaps totally nonsensical.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •