Originally Posted by
labcoat
From my experience:
Process/Result exists, as does Static/Dynamic... We wouldn't be able to speak of functions the way we do if the latter didn't exist (function blocks are just clubs interposed with Static/Dynamic)... As for the former, we could, in turn, not speak about +/- if these didn't exist, yet we do and think this makes sense, so under the same mentality Process/Result is in.
Positivist/negativist is formed by interposing Process/Result and Static/Dynamic. It is only half-useful. The two variants of either should not be confused as they are different and only superficially similar. Positivist/negativist itself denotes a very superficial quality. Positive/Result/Dynamic and Positive/Process/Static are both "positive" but still in many respects irreconcileably different. Same goes for Negative/Result/Static and Negative/Process/Dynamic.
The best way to use the above is to use them in conjunction; in other words using the following groups instead:
Positive/Result/Dynamic
Negative/Process/Dynamic
Negative/Result/Static
Positive/Process/Static
These can be used as "sub-temperaments" and can help making it easier to understand the similarity between types that succeed eachother in the sing of supervision... For example, INTj, ESTp, ISFj and ENFp are all Negative/Result/Static, and there are certain behaviours that can be linked to this quality. (in this case, quick, decisive behavior, quickly getting one's bearings, seeing all relevant sides to an issue quickly, etc. Also: an intense gaze, penetrating stare)
Aristocrat/Democrat exists aswell, but is redundant when one already uses quadras and clubs. Aristocrat = beta OR delta AND nf OR st, Democrat = alpha OR gamma AND nt OR sf
Taciturn/Narrator: another superficial trait. Limited usability. Again, Static and Dynamic versions are very much different and not to be confused.... Use Taciturn/Democrat/Static, Narrator/Aristocrat/Static, Narrator/Democrat/Dynamic, Taciturn/Aristocrat/Static instead.... Better yet, combine them with quadra + club as a way of understanding what superficial qualities are to be associated with these: all gamma NTs are narrators, all alpha NTs are taciturns, all beta NFs are taciturns, all beta STs are narrators, etc.
Merry/Serious and Reasonable/Resolute follow directly from the intertype relations. People who are on the same "side" of either divide simply "get along well" in a certain way according to intertype relation theory. Can't deny that these work and that they are important.
The quadras, too, are simply ways of grouping together people that get along well and should be understood as such. They are simply formed when Merry/Serious and Reasonable/Resolute are combined.
Dichotomies that I have not seen any validation for (too superficial to merit naming):
Emotivist (accepting thinking OR creating feeling)
Constructivist (accepting feeling OR creating thinking)
Tactical (accepting intuition OR creating sensing)
Stategic (accepting sensing OR creating intuition)
Obstinate (accepting merry OR creating serious)
Compliant (accepting serious OR creating merry)
Carefree (accepting reasonable OR creating resolute)
Foresight (accepting resolute OR creating reasonable)
But: the fact that most Accepting functions are associated with traits that are almost opposite to the function's own nature (such as Accepting Thinking = Emotivist, Accepting Sensing = Strategic) suggests that accepting functions are milder variants of a function than creating functions... For example, you can infer from the fact that a person has a certain polite emotional flair, that he is an accepting thinker as opposed to a creating thinker. The dichotomies themselves are not really necessary for this insight, though. Just: accepting = mild, creating = fanatic.
Apologies for the lack of justification, I'm just relating what has been working for me.