# Thread: Socionics.com article by Sergei Ganin: "How to convert MBTI types into Socionics types"

1. ## Socionics.com article by Sergei Ganin: "How to convert MBTI types into Socionics types"

what do you all think?

i dont quite understand.. i thought the tertiary function for socionics INTj was Fi. The auxiliary and tertiary will not be opposing sides of the same type of pair (T/F, S/N), but rather one from each pair. what am i not understanding?

Did Ganin mean there is a war between your second and SIXTH function, as that's related to your third?

2. he is speaking to people who are familiar with MB. in their lingo the model goes like this (for intp):

Ti Ne Si Fe

So dominant = Ti, Aux. = Ne, Tertiary = Si, and inferior = Fe. He is just trying to get the idea of the N vs. S or T vs. F conflict across not saying that those particular functions conflict but is using their model as the method of the translation of this idea. However like you pointed out his worrds were poorly chosen because it would probably make people think that Si and Ne or whatever fight one another.

3. I don't agree with the article.

4. haha well according to this test im INTp. what.

5. Originally Posted by Rocky
I don't agree with the article.
and i agree with you.

6. You wrote:

i dont quite understand.. i thought the tertiary function for socionics INTj was Fi. The auxiliary and tertiary will not be opposing sides of the same type of pair (T/F, S/N), but rather one from each pair. what am i not understanding?

What he meant, he said at the end in a short and clear manner but the whole article is too abstract and not easy to diagest.

The dominant and inferiour assumed to be the first and the last (the fourth functions. For example, for INTJ it is and . INTJ are thinking types but morality means a lot to them although they are not in a hurry to show it off. That is the war. However, if you can determine what is your dominanat function: you are 100% sure you are a thinking type, then you are INTJ in socionics. If you are not sure about it - you are INTP.

Now -auxiliary and tertiary - means for INTJ two functions in the middle: and . and they do not create a war as such because the person is not that strong in this functions - according to Ganin (I am not sure about this). However, if the person breaks his head between and so, according to Ganin, he is INTP because this two functions are strongest then for him and create the war.

I hope I explained it clear enough ( I am a professional teacher - )

7. Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj

I am unsure as to whether I am T or F type, but I am absolutly sure I am intuitive. So, I guess according to that article that makes me atleast an XXXp.

8. Originally Posted by rmcnew
Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj

I am unsure as to whether I am T or F type, but I am absolutly sure I am intuitive. So, I guess according to that article that makes me atleast an XXXp.
BS, ignore the article.

9. I don't think the article is entirely BS. In fact it's quite useful as a generalization. I don't think it should be taken as a rule however.

10. Originally Posted by Rocky
Originally Posted by rmcnew
Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj

I am unsure as to whether I am T or F type, but I am absolutly sure I am intuitive. So, I guess according to that article that makes me atleast an XXXp.
BS, ignore the article.
No, I do not think it does the article justice to ignore it. It seems to me that Ganin is under the impression that a person would be absolutly sure of his or her own primary Ego function in a specific way, and unsure of his or her secondary EGO function in another specific way. In that exact context in which he intended , I would agree with his logical deduction. He even goes on to state that the hidden agenda conflicts with the EGO block functions, and that is something that I myself have noted and have written in my own articles.

So, I diagree with those who say they disagree with the article, as I see no reason to disagree. What Ganin is saying is in tune with socionics theory. Though, it is still not a direct correspordance and conversion in theory away from the J/P switch problem, only a way to figure out a type in spite of the MBTI way of doing things.

11. .. so me, Herzblut, Cone, Sychophant, and Taz are all Js in socionics?

12. Originally Posted by Rocky
.. so me, Herzblut, Cone, Sychophant, and Taz are all Js in socionics?
Maybe I should rephrase what I said ... I still agree with the article within the context that Ganin intended, which is exactly what I think people are missing *context* ...

Let me explain by stating what I feel is wrong with the article ...

The problem with the article is that Ganin failed to mention that not everyone is effected by their own hidden agenda the same way as the article describes and may not be confused about their own type on account of the hidden agenda alone. Some people may have competition between their 1st, 5th or 4th, and 8th functions, while other people may confuse their 2nd, 6th, or 3rd and 7th functions.

The reason the article may apply to me and not everyone else is because I am personally right now having confusion between my 2nd, 6th, 4th, and 8th functions and that is reason I can not seem to decide between ENTp, ENFj, and INFp and I know I can only be one of those 3 types.

If you take the time to research and look at the models between the types, it will help you to grasp this concept.

13. Just out of curiousity is there anyone still confused about this article of Ganin's? There really is no reason to disagree with it if you know where Ganin is coming from and how it relates to socionics theory.

14. According to that article I am a judging type.

15. Guys, Sergei Ganin is NOT WRONG IN WHAT HE SAYS, he mostly neglected to clarify that not everyone is totally influenced by their hidden agenda alone in the way he described. In fact, I will be sending him an e-mail nice little article he could consider adding to his website here shortly that will clear this mess up and everyone can quit misunderstanding the article.

If you do not understand why I am writting this, read what I wrote in the previous post of this thread as I explained there why there is misunderstanding.

16. Originally Posted by Rocky
.. so me, Herzblut, Cone, Sychophant, and Taz are all Js in socionics?
What, you are SLI just cos you said it so? LOL, BS

17. then i'm a ___p of some sort.

18. We don't need Ganin, we can clear up the mess ourselves! Nobody yet responded clearly to what I have wrote:

To Rocky:

I think we have got a misunderstanding here. You said:

"For example, it is harder for me to distinguish between sensing/intution, and the same thing happend to Cone... and I believe Sychophant had similar problems. Taz is another one who was split between sensing/intuition, but she's a perciever".

The Ganin's article suggests exactly this: that perceivers/irrational types in socionincs will have difficulty to decide between senses and intuition, becuase these two functions accroding to Ganin are in the war. In the war means that first/base functions is the strongest/dominant one and the fourth is inferior but is also strong enough and represents your ambition.

Although we got used to count the first and the second functions as strongest - Ganin puts slightly different emphasis on the fourth function. The forht function is fighting for the dominance with the base function. While the second/creative function is strong but has got a different emphasis as suplemetary or supportive function. That means that the second function does not fight for the dominance with the first one but rather helps the first function to get it's way through to achive what it wants.

Take for for example your type, it is important for you to feel in harmony with the place where you are, to feel comfortable (sorry for simlifications)- your base function is . Under the best condition you don't need to do much, but if the need arise, if you feel uncomfortable with the person or in disharmony with your environment - you will use a very practical approach: you will avoid this person and rearrange the immidiate environment. You will not sit and think -you will use your This is not the war but a helping hand from your second function.

Your last function is , this is where your ambition is to feel the future, to discover something like different parts of the brains connected to socionics types - to be ahead of what is known. So do not believe that the fourth function is in reality the weakest one - it will be strong enough to fight for the dominance if you want it to be this way.

The people which you mentioned Taz, Cone, Pedro, , Sychopat - are all irrational types in socionincs so what you said about their strugle between senses and intuition is understandable and does not disagree with Ganin's article. MysticSonic is INTJ and rational. As regards to Pedro, he criticises things which is ok for INTP. As regards to feelings and morality, i did not notice that it is his strong(est) function.

Ganin is intellegent but has got difficulty to express his knowledge in a sensible/popular way. Hopefully he will take next time more effort to do so.

For Ms.K: How this model could be applied to INTJ?

You are sure that you are a thinker. You prefer to be engaged in theoretical/sructural knowledge and this is where your hunger is: the food for brain . Your supplementary function helps you to progress/ understand things: you see the abilites of the object/event/phenomenon, you can take it mentally aprt and put it back togehter and to create something new. That is why INTJ are called Analysts. There si no war here. However, the ambitioin is in relationships, why? Because you are most probably a romantic person and have got high moral standards without showing them off.

When i met my husband he did not talk much about morality, he just believed that i will see somehow that he is good. He is proud to be a honest person. He does loses his temper at times as he is not too patient with noty children. He likes to tease the cat. When she bites him he smack her and immideatly after that jumps up to cuddle her. So he is clever and he is good and what is stronger - God knows. If he could to talk about morality like i do than he could be not Analyst but Moralist. But he does not talk much in the same way as i do not produce clever articles...
________________

19. Originally Posted by Anonymous
Originally Posted by Rocky
.. so me, Herzblut, Cone, Sychophant, and Taz are all Js in socionics?
What, you are SLI just cos you said it so? LOL, BS
Look, it's not just me, it's a bunch of other people too, and we're not all wrong about our type. Discojoe is another who said that above. StevENTj said the same thing on another site. Pedro agreed with me as well. I don't know what connection you have with Ganin (or are you him? ), but not everything he says is the law.

@ McNew: you may be right about it not suppose to work every time, but even so, Ganin is still confusing people. I have started to see people use his "rule" to judge type when when I haven't seen it really be reliable. They just take it as he tells it.

^^ I agree with this for the most part in that VI isn't 100% accurate, you need more than a picture, etc... There is only one way of typing that I know of that is 100% accurate. But I started to cringe at the end of it when he started to say that VI can be learned intuitively. *shrug* That's the last thing you want to do when it comes to VI. In his book, Jon N mentioned that trying to type people by filling in the gaps in your head with intuition is what you should stay away from. It leads to you typing something that isn't there. The best thing is to make a concious effort to use the senses (if you have more of a conceptual brain).

20. Rmcnew wrote:

No, I do not think it does the article justice to ignore it. It seems to me that Ganin is under the impression that a person would be absolutly sure of his or her own primary Ego function in a specific way, and unsure of his or her secondary EGO function in another specific way. In that exact context in which he intended , I would agree with his logical deduction. He even goes on to state that the hidden agenda conflicts with the EGO block functions, and that is something that I myself have noted and have written in my own articles. .[/quote]

I have got something to say as regards to hidden agenda but first it would be interesting to know what you mean by "hidden agenda conflicts with EGO block functions. May be you could explain the idea in a few words. When i have read the artcile i didn't notice that he said anything like that. I saw it as opposition in which the person is sure what he is and what he definetly not. And what he is definetly not can be determined as his weakest function.

I also would be interested to get a closer look at what functions you are confused. I see things in more simpler way. I am sure if we know well enough the first four functions - we can easily figure out your type. Shall we try?

21. The people which you mentioned Taz, Cone, Pedro, , Sychopat - are all irrational types in socionincs so what you said about their strugle between senses and intuition is understandable and does not disagree with Ganin's article. MysticSonic is INTJ and rational. As regards to Pedro, he criticises things which is ok for INTP. As regards to feelings and morality, i did not notice that it is his strong(est) function.
Well, if that's true, then he gives the wrong impression when he wraps up the article at the end.

22. Originally Posted by Rocky
.. so me, Herzblut, Cone, Sychophant, and Taz are all Js in socionics?
You are perceivers or irrationals in socionincs. Of course you, Rocky, is very intuitve and nobody argues that - it is exactly what I wrote! Your first function is and your fourth function is that makes you strong in both functions and that is the war between function, because they both strong. And the same thing about all other people you mentioned: they are perceivers or irrationals in socionics.

Do i talk a different English so that people just do not see what I am saying? You are irrational and that is why you argue against Ganin articles. What you actually are saying that there are other original ways to determine the type which work for you. I agree and so many others, i believe. For rationals tests may be the best way to determin the type for irrationals - their own. Rules are not for everybody...sometimes.

What Ganin said about intuitve deciding on the type is what i said when i just joined the site: it can be done outomatically. I don't know eather Ganin repeats me in different words or we just know it by experiences and so this is true. When something is true - people agree.
Intuitive determining does not mean that you fill in the missing parts of your brain - but quite on the opposite: there is no process of any logical thinking whatsoever - you see and you know! Don't ask me how- those who have intuition as a strongest function could explain things like this the best.

23. Olga, what Ganin said is:

Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj
So if you are unsure of S or N, then you should be a J type in socionics, which seems to be the opposite of what you're saying? Also, Ganin was using some MBTI terms in the article... so that might lead to more confusion.

24. Originally Posted by Olga
Intuitive determining does not mean that you fill in the missing parts of your brain - but quite on the opposite: there is no process of any logical thinking whatsoever - you see and you know!
... which is sensing, no?

25. ## Olga versus Ganin

ha- ha, you are right Rocky, what I am saying is opposite to Ganin .

Ganin said:

So, if a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), then such person find it hard to keep these two in peace and may find it difficult to decide whether they are F or T. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), and should be quite easy to separate. Because the Dominant function is Perceiving in this case, the person would be Socionics Perceiving type (XXXp). So if MBTI INTJ person is more uncertain about being T or F than S or N i.e. IN(T/F)J or INxJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTp.

If a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), then such person may find it difficult to keep these two in friendship and may find it hard to decide whether they are S or N. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), and should be quite easy to divide. Because in this case the Dominant function is Judging, the person would be Socionics Judging type (XXXj). So if MBTI INTJ person is more unsure about being S or N than T or F i.e. I(S/N)TJ or IxTJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTj.

So here it is all of the above simplified:

Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj

And what I have understood was on the opposite. Functions which are easier to separate should be Auxiliary and Tertiary. But what is hard to separate is Dominant and Inferiour. However, I still did not change my mind and believe that things are the way are see it. Functions interact with each ohter and have different influences on each other. The Socioncs write very intellegent articles but the whole kitchen of interaction is not made much clear unless we try to figure it out ourselves and together. For example, i have read that article about hidden agenda and it wasn't very clear how Ganin came to this conclusion. now I have interesting thoughts about it, but first I would like to hear Rmcnew respond about the conflict between hidden agenda and ego function. It might be what i am thinking about. I believe that functions affect each other in all directions and what affects what- depends on situation. On the ohter hand there are some clear patterns in those interactions too. I wrote for example, how the second function assist the first - in your type : and it is possible to see how the forth function affects/associates with the first: to Your intuition works best in the world of and that is why you talk about sensing and movements of the body and brains. As for me: my forth is and it is associated with . So I am clever enough but only in people's world, i could not be any clever with computers and math and technical staff.

I guess when we understand better the kitchen of the functions we will better understand all statements of socionics and we shall challenge them!

Next will be the hidden agenda and the forth function. What kind of relationship between them? Rmcnew said hidden agenda affects ego function: which ones and how? And... whose statement seems more sensible to you: mine or Ganin's? Do I and Ganin mean the same functions by Tertiary, Auxiliary and etc...

For Rocky, I understand it this: -dominant, auxiliary, -tertirary, -inferiour.

26. Originally Posted by Rocky
I don't know what connection you have with Ganin (or are you him? )
He's my bitch I own him LOL!

Originally Posted by Rocky
But I started to cringe at the end of it when he started to say that VI can be learned intuitively. *shrug* That's the last thing you want to do when it comes to VI. In his book, Jon N mentioned that trying to type people by filling in the gaps in your head with intuition is what you should stay away from. It leads to you typing something that isn't there. The best thing is to make a concious effort to use the senses (if you have more of a conceptual brain).
Jokes apart, it looks like you do have strong preference for S and don't really think much about N (advise people to stay away from it???????). Your S-ness is quite obvious and sticks out in your posts, what makes you think you are unsure about being S or N?

27. Jokes apart, it looks like you do have strong preference for S and don't really think much about N (advise people to stay away from it???????). Your S-ness is quite obvious and sticks out in your posts, what makes you think you are unsure about being S or N?
no, no.. I'm not saying that people should stay away from intuition altogether. Both Intuition and Sensing have their places. I'm saying for evaluating people on who they are (especially through VI and the like), seeing "what is" is what you should focus on. Intuition can get in the way of trying to type people that way. As for me... I had a harder time deciding weather I was a sensor or intuitive a while ago, at least that one was more unclear than thinking/feeling. But I'm not unsure anymore.

28. You know what I noticed when you type somebody visually, it is not that much about face features sometimes it is confusing, some times striking but most of the time it is expressed in the look as if the inner self of the type gets out and strikes you - and then you feel you know the type. However, intuition is not my strong point so i still try whenever possible to use tests - I need to hear the person's opinion about his possible type and do not suggest anything I am still rational.

I think we need to talk at some point about Reinin features here. Probably you can see the type/personality from the different ungles and still be right - to arrive to the same descriptions of the person.

29. Originally Posted by Rocky
Jokes apart, it looks like you do have strong preference for S and don't really think much about N (advise people to stay away from it???????). Your S-ness is quite obvious and sticks out in your posts, what makes you think you are unsure about being S or N?
no, no.. I'm not saying that people should stay away from intuition altogether. Both Intuition and Sensing have their places. I'm saying for evaluating people on who they are (especially through VI and the like), seeing "what is" is what you should focus on. Intuition can get in the way of trying to type people that way. As for me... I had a harder time deciding weather I was a sensor or intuitive a while ago, at least that one was more unclear than thinking/feeling. But I'm not unsure anymore.
I will agree that Ganin's article could be confusing. He knows something but is not on hurry to share it. What I think he meant was that P types could never balance T and F and J types always struggle between N and S or whatever. It was interesting read anyway.

30. Hmm, an odd article. I guess it does have some merit, but rmcnew's critique of it sounds about right, It discounts the possibility of that people can doubt wheter they are S/N T/F of other reasons other than hidden agenda versus the creative function. This what prevents his probably useful observation from being useful as an absolute rule. I know for certain that I would be much more prone to see myself as a sensor rather than as an ethical type, but must that make a judging type alone? I am not certain about that. Being a logical type is not just a single state of mind. There probably exists variations in how far you go to the extreme of being 100% a logical type. A logical type that has comparably strong tendencies towards being an ethical type would probably be prone to wonder about being T/F in spite of being a judging type.

31. ## Re: Olga versus Ganin

I still don't get it.

However, I enjoyed this:

Originally Posted by Anonymous
kitchen of interaction.
and this

Originally Posted by Anonymous
Your intuition works best in the world of and that is why you talk about sensing and movements of the body and brains. As for me: my forth is and it is associated with . So I am clever enough but only in people's world, i could not be any clever with computers and math and technical staff.

I guess when we understand better the kitchen of the functions we will better understand all statements of socionics and we shall challenge them!
I do think that as an INTj, I am feeling but most prominently within a structure (have a moral sense). I can "convince" myself not to feel a certain way, actually affecting my feelings.

However, i still think i am more confused about my T and F than my S and N-- Though some people thought i was an S before! -- which would make me a perceiver according to this article.

I can understand that Ganin might have meant this under particular circumstances, but this is not clear to me. Still.

32. I understand what he is saying(I think we all do now). The problems relating to accepting functions of socionics (S/N for rationals and T/F for irrationals) should be more obvious in testing (I assume with introspection) than any problems relating to the producing functions in the socionics type (T/F for rationals and S/N for irrationals).

It makes sense on one hand, but on the other, these are the least conscious functions and most hidden from introspection! As an INTj, I become aware of my Feeling problems more often and consciously than any Sensing problems. Not that they may be more obvious in my activity to an outside observer, but from my introversion, I will not admit any problems relating to sensing to myself.

Maybe this is causing the people on these forums to not agree.

Reuben, I looked at your chart before I read Ganin's article. I figured it was the 'birth of the type' if you will, assuming it's a process. Now that I've read the article, I don't understand what you really meant there.

So the question basically is....are you more aware of your hidden agenda and Polr based issues or your role and dual seeking functions? The article says the former, from my introspection and observations I'd say the latter.

33. Originally Posted by metaiwan
Reuben, I looked at your chart before I read Ganin's article. I figured it was the 'birth of the type' if you will, assuming it's a process. Now that I've read the article, I don't understand what you really meant there.

So the question basically is....are you more aware of your hidden agenda and Polr based issues or your role and dual seeking functions? The article says the former, from my introspection and observations I'd say the latter.
Perhaps I should point something out in light of the model I posted earlier.

http://the16types.info/models.php

Corresponding Blocks
There are 4 further groupings of blocks besides the ego, superego, superid, and id groupings. These are the corresponding blocks of psyche; you will find supplimenting functions in these blocks.

active will - the first and fifth functions
authority - the second and sixth functions
neurosis - the third and seventh functions
phobia - the fourth and eighth functions
This description is not very clear ... it seems to neglect to say that within those groups the functions compete against each other

If you will have a look at the model I posted, you will see that the inferior rational functions are competeing against each other, and the inferior irrational functions are competeing against each other. However, the irrational functions and the rational functions are competeing against each other as a whole unit, that is all of the rational functions vs all of the irrational functions. Depending upon whether a person has dominant emphasis on their irrational or rational side despite individual dominance of functions, a person will either be more influenced by the hidden agenda function or more influenced by the suggestive function. Either way, most people are usually influenced by one or the other.

34. This description is not very clear ... it seems to neglect to say that within those groups the functions compete against each other
huh? what are you talking about?

35. Originally Posted by Rocky
This description is not very clear ... it seems to neglect to say that within those groups the functions compete against each other
huh? what are you talking about?
Look at the chart I made ...

No wonder you missed the point of Ganin's article ... it is the same thing that he is saying here ...

The Thinking and Feeling pair of functions is bound together in the same way the Sensing and Intuition pair is. The two functions in a pair always go up against each or fight for the domination if you like. If one of the functions in a pair appears to be Dominant function then the other function in the same pair is Inferior and is well suppressed by the Dominant function, and the domination of the Dominant function is obvious. However, if one of the functions in a pair is Auxiliary, then the other would be Tertiary, which represents the Hidden Agenda. The Auxiliary and Tertiary combination of functions provokes a war between these functions, because there is no clear dominator. On one hand the Auxiliary function is much stronger than Tertiary, however the Tertiary function is the Hidden Agenda and is extremely important. So what happens in reality is that a person find it difficult to separate these two functions in order to give them clear preference, the functions always appear to be mixed up together to a certain degree.

So, if a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), then such person find it hard to keep these two in peace and may find it difficult to decide whether they are F or T. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), and should be quite easy to separate. Because the Dominant function is Perceiving in this case, the person would be Socionics Perceiving type (XXXp). So if MBTI INTJ person is more uncertain about being T or F than S or N i.e. IN(T/F)J or INxJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTp.

If a person's Auxiliary and Tertiary functions are Sensing and Intuition (or Intuition and Sensing), then such person may find it difficult to keep these two in friendship and may find it hard to decide whether they are S or N. The Dominant and Inferior in this case would be Feeling and Thinking (or Thinking and Feeling), and should be quite easy to divide. Because in this case the Dominant function is Judging, the person would be Socionics Judging type (XXXj). So if MBTI INTJ person is more unsure about being S or N than T or F i.e. I(S/N)TJ or IxTJ, then he or she will correspond to Socionics INTj.

So here it is all of the above simplified:

Unsure about being T or F -> you are Socionics XXXp
Unsure about being S or N -> you are Socionics XXXj
The only diffrence is that he is trying to say something along the line that an emphasis on one [the hidden agenda specifically] means you are a p or j type. But, this is wrong in that in itself it has to do with the dominance of a single function and not the infringement of another function, and that is where I disagree with Ganin.

36. I saw your chart before... and I understood Ganin's article, what I was asking is, why do you think functions like the dominant and dual-seeking "compete" against each other. They don't compete, they help each other out.

37. Originally Posted by Rocky
I saw your chart before... and I understood Ganin's article, what I was asking is, why do you think functions like the dominant and dual-seeking "compete" against each other. They don't compete, they help each other out.
Whatever the confusion is over the nature of my own language, that does not mean a person can not confuse his or her own suggestive function for his or her own dominant function just as a person can confuse his or her hidden agenda for the creative function. I suppose you would know what I mean by that ...

38. Originally Posted by rmcnew
Originally Posted by Rocky
I saw your chart before... and I understood Ganin's article, what I was asking is, why do you think functions like the dominant and dual-seeking "compete" against each other. They don't compete, they help each other out.
Whatever the confusion is over the nature of my own language, that does not mean a person can not confuse his or her own suggestive function for his or her own dominant function just as a person can confuse his or her hidden agenda for the creative function. I suppose you would know what I mean by that ...
OK, that makes sense, but the way you put it before sounded like they get in the way of each other, because you say they are "competing". The dual-seeking can be confused for the dominant funciton because it's the function you wish you could use in the way someone who is dominant uses it.