Function balancing and interpreting Ti-Ne

[Brilliand]

The central topic of this thread is the implications of this statement:

I have learned to better balance my Ti with Te in order reach across quadras better.

Similarly, as some users have noted, I have a tendency to moderate, which comes out in a distinctly fashion. Although I was decently labeled as the "Diplomat" in Flame Warriors, I have found that my efforts are actually useful for reaching between opinions in my own quadra.

I see two issues related to Logos's statement: A) I begin to see a pattern of LIIs acting as interpreters; what other types do this? What variety of interpreters would be helpful, in addition to the services Logos and I already provide? B) Logos has deliberately brought his Te, and to a lesser extent his Se, up to scratch. I, on the other hand, have been focusing more on my DS. Are there several areas of specialization that would be helpful here? Pros and cons of various methods that are not really areas of specialization? A pattern of developing elements that would be helpful based on life stages?

LII are almost certain to be handy with and , and passing with , and . From much of Rick's writings, I would have thought that developing the ego is the way to go. However, both Logos and I seem to have the idea that some normally invisible function is worth the trouble to bring up to scratch.

[Trevor]

Develop your superego(it's conscious after all).

[Expat]

I don't see anything remarkable about Logos's statement.

A dominant will easily make use of , and the other way around for dominants. That is why, in situations where their use is straightforward, LIIs and LSIs communicate and work well with LSEs and LIEs - as in, solving technical issues at work.

Problems related to whether they have or as dominant function will arise in less straightforward situations - as in, discussing personal preferences, beliefs, and priorities towards solving a problem etc.

If you want to reach across quadras as a dominant, it's merely a matter of being aware of why the dominant takes that approach, rather than just argue with, "yes, but don't you see that is the more important of the two" etc. I see what Logos mentioned as more a matter of awareness than anything else.

[mu4]

Super-ego development is more or less moral development.

Where as ego development is more selfish and material oriented.

I've found people that do not develop their super-ego turn out more or less sociopathic where as people that are too into their super-ego can become depressed and suicidal.