the effect of not having suggestive function needs met

[Joy]

So I know the typical Socionics wisdom is that the lead function should be the most visible, something that you couldn't hide even if you wanted to. It seems to me though that proper use of your lead function is highly dependent on having had the needs of your suggestive function met. Each pair of IME opposites (Fe and Ti, for example) is highly dependent on the other in other function in its pair in order to work properly. This is why the role function is more apparent in "undualized" individuals. It's not that the role is directly making up for the weak suggestive function (as I've seen stated in Socionics literature/communities). It's that in the absence of quality suggestive function input, the ignoring function works with the role to cover the rational/irrational bases for the individual. As such, we not only see an increased focus on the role function, but also the ignoring. This effect is amplified when the role and ignoring functions are rewarded in your environment.

Thoughts?

[Exodus]

It's not that the role is directly making up for the weak suggestive function (as I've seen stated in Socionics literature/communities). It's that in the absence of quality suggestive function input, the ignoring function works with the role to cover the rational/irrational bases for the individual.

Maybe a little. The former effect seems way more important though. My understanding is that elements in the same domain compensate for each other, so I don't see how the ignoring function would help all that much. It would help much more to support the mobilizing function. Do you have an example in mind?

Of all the dual pairs it seems like creative + mobilizing work together the most in the same individual. Never thought about ignoring + role specifically but it would make sense that they are the next most likely.

In Model A2, r1 and r5 seem to also work together somewhat.

[Joy]

Maybe a little. The former effect seems way more important though. My understanding is that elements in the same domain compensate for each other, so I don't see how the ignoring function would help all that much. It would help much more to support the mobilizing function. Do you have an example in mind?

Of all the dual pairs it seems like creative + mobilizing work together the most in the same individual. Never thought about ignoring + role specifically but it would make sense that they are the next most likely.

In Model A2, r1 and r5 seem to also work together somewhat.

This is mainly an idea that I'm playing with. I didn't mean to make it sound like I'm sure it works this way or that the role doesn't compensate for a weak suggestive function at all. I do think that the role covers for the suggestive function. I was more looking at why/how. I'm mostly just fascinated right now with how opposite IMEs (such as Se and Ni) work together.

So, using SEE as an example:

Se: Without Ni, it can still do its thing, but it ends up making a mess by doing all sorts of rash/impulsive things and pushing in the wrong directions.

Ne: This works to balance out the forcefulness of Se when Ni isn't available, for example: "I want to go off on that person because they're doing something shitty, but I should stop to consider their circumstances/perspective first." Ni would support the harsh response if it seemed called for based on the overall Ni picture of the situation. Si might work with Ne in such a scenario by considering things like, "Maybe the person is over hungry or has a headache."

Ni: We build up personal experiences in our 1D functions but lack the nuanced understanding to see how this situation might be different from others we've encountered. Staying with the above example, the SEE might go off on someone for something that wasn't really that big of a deal because it reminds them of a somewhat similar situation they had experienced, and they think it will likely end the same way if they don't do something about it. Or they may remember a similar situation in which they went off on someone and ended up later finding out that they had been too harsh and feeling bad. A good source of Ni would provide insight into the ways in which the situations are similar and different, the underlying causes. This might cause the SEE to refrain from an unwise reaction or to ignore the Ne tendency to think "but maybe I'm not seeing their perspective" and take decisive action.

Si: I don't understand how Si and Ne work together as well as I understand the Se/Ni dynamic. I guess Si grounds Ne and makes ideas workable irl, and Ne gets Si out of its rut by providing ideas and inspiration. I don't see why this wouldn't work within an individual who's doing some of both of those things.


So yeah, maybe a better way to put it would be that we can use our lead function without quality suggestive input, but we learn through experience that we're making a mess and then hesitate and fall back on our role a bit more.