Ok, this is pretty much not confined purely to this post alone. I've been reading what it is you guys have to say and, obviously, on my part there is some confusion. That's to be expected. So basically, my questions are these:

I take it that the 'gradations' of the dichotomies applies to more than just the S/N in that there can be double introverts, extraverts overlooking introverts, double thinkers, judging overlooking perceiving, and so on. Is this a correct assumption? Essentially, you've got the master/slave type, say INFj-INTp which would amount to double introvert, double intuiter, feeling overlooking thinking, and judging overlooking perceiving if I'm grasping the underlying form of these things. From the perspective of the individual, would this be experienced as a very strong pull towards I and N, as well as slight preferences in F and j in typing themselves? There are, of course, probably other considerations to think of, like a person's skewed view of themself and so on, so maybe it would be more accurate to place these judgements in an overall consensus of an (hopefully) objective outside view.

Also, I wanted to get a clearer picture of the dynamics of the master/slave distinction in terms of the person. It's been said that the master is the metabolism type and the slave is the energic type. Does this amount to the master type being the use of that individual's 'preferred' types of energy and the slave being the kind of energy that the person naturally exudes? I'm also unclear on what precisely is meant by energy in this context. I guess I've thought of it more in terms of information, where it relates to energy in terms of their own and another's ability to take in that information in a sense that is valued by them and doesn't require extensive energy in doing so. Then there's also the question of what this means for how the person views/interacts with the world. This issue has seemed to be addressed, but more elaboration would be helpful to (and appreciated by) me.

There are some more thoughts I have on this whole deal, but I think I'm going to have to ruminate on them some more before I go about spouting them off. I suppose my interest is the effect this has on looking at someone's system of values. In the INFj-INTj case, would be valued by both, but is strong in one sense and weak in another, whereas would be valued only in one and strong in two senses (if that makes sense ) Given this example, you might quantify their values as predominantly Fi and Te, while also saying that these aren't the strongest functions they use (which would be Ne and Ni, albeit valued less than those two). Though as to the practical use or significance, I don't know. Just something that struck me as potentially interesting, I guess. Anyway, hopefully some of you might find these considerations worth thinking about.