Any ideas of how the second function differs when it is a second function from when it is a first function? People seem to think that in ENTps would appear the same way as in INTJs. However it would appear as part of the and the would appear to be part of the to some extent. In other words you cant take the functions apart when dealing with real human beings like you can in some hypothetical model. So I dont agree that you can tell someone is ENTp by deciding they think like an INTj. As far as I can see, an ENTps thought patterns would have some parallels with that of ENTjs, INTjs, and INTps.
Note: ENTp is just an example. I could have chosen any type. The point is that I think that a said function would appear differently in a type with the said function as a 1st function, then it would in a type with the said function as a first function.
Do you agree or do you disagree with my thoughts?