Originally Posted by
hitta
Well its my opinion that +Ne and -Ni are the same function. But thats basically my point, the E in ENTp doesn't make sense.
i've used "+/-" before, i think when typing Nietzsche, so i'd probably better state my own POV on this.
one way to look at +/-: its relation to the functions expressed in [canonical/8 function] model A is dependent upon the aristocracy/democracy dichotomy. aristocrats have -perceiving, +rational for their [canonical] model A functions. socially involved functions (S and F) are +perceiving and -rational in democrats (out of the canonical 8 functions).
you'll have to use your own imagination a bit with this because a full treatment would make for a very long post perhaps worth an entirely new thread. but tendencies like these i think make +/- useful in better understanding how model A functions favor dualization and quadra values.
for brief example, is a democratic gamma NT with his or her own concrete +Ni plans for profiting off of abstract -Te going to value -Se going into the situation in chaotic pursuit of +Ti? does the inclusive communitarian nature frequently associated with +Fi or the dependable traditionalism with +Te suit gamma quadra values well?
these tendencies seem entirely derivable from model A itself though combined with the descriptions of quadra and dualization. to me +/- is a practical tool of notation sometimes rather than a ground-breaking or even necessary part of the [canonical] model. and i think it would be a major mistake in contradiction with [canonical] model A to say certain +functions and certain -functions are entirely equivalent.
introversion and extroversion define other characteristics that just the certainty/uncertainty, inclusiveness/exclusiveness, etc. prevalent in the +/- descriptions. a large part of introversion/extroversion is where stuff happens, privately in one's own head or publicly in the external world.
i think you'd be hard-pressed to convince anyone that ENTp's and INFp's have the same intuition base for example. maybe +/- suggests that they process data similarly or have similar motivations w.r.t. that base. that's interesting to think about. but the total effect, how each base function manifests itself in reality, seems very different to me, introversion vs. extroversion of each intuition function being a major part of it. not just different rational functions as would be the case if you assumed base equivalency.
how is this for an interpretation?: ENTp and INFp both have +Ne and –Ni in the base, but in ENTp +Ne is much more pronounced. there's an easy way to disprove a more "equivalentist" interpretation: if ENTp and INFp have the same base exactly, then you've just rendered the entire introversion/extroversion dichotomy inconsistent, as well as static/dynamic! doesn't sound like socionics anymore.
as one last example, consider INTj's and ESTj's. i can see some +Te in INTj's in the way many are attracted to developing long-standing canons of external information. INTj's are often at home in academia (more so than ENTj IME) where the integrity of information and the related external institutions is prized. the pursuit of developing their own internal -Ti thought system can greatly benefit from these conditions. -Te attempts to profit off of uncertainty here (rather than reorganize and secure things) are likely going to be frowned upon by the INTj.
but the day an INTj starts being more concerned about these external institutions than developing his or her own internal -Ti thought system, i think that INTj's base isn't an INTj base anymore. instead that is a different type's different base (ESTj).