Quote Originally Posted by labcoat
I've come to the conclusion that political outlook may be leading us to different interpretations of the functions. In particular, I interpret Extraverted Feeling as "subjective experience". Others seem to interpret it as "ethics". I don't really see the correlation, except in so far as one can use knowledge of a person's subjective experience as a guide to whether or not something should be reasonably expected from them. This is not the ethics that is described in most analyses of the subject I have read, however....

Perhaps liberals have a tendency to perceive being ethical as being open to many points of view, thus allowing one to understand what a person is attempting to accomplish and as such, to know what they feel themselves open to.
I have an idea that has been floating around in my mind for a while. If, like I showed to you before, context lines can be connected to function states, perhaps their influence consists in establishing which function state a person's desired function state is. Any use of master-type functions would then occur with the intention to move events closer to the state of ones context line.

Remember the double-function model-A machintruc displayed a while ago. According to that model, an INTj has an ego block with: 1. Ti- and Ne+; and 2. Te+ and Ni-. Upholding the rule that events (eg. the current function state of part of the environment) always move from the + to the - function, the former causes a movement to the right, whereas the latter causes movement to the left.

Now perhaps the second set of functions (Te+ and Ni- in the example) are actually correlants of the aggressive functions that you tend to associate with awareness of context lines. Only when this second set of functions is enabled does a person have full control over the 'flow' of information in his environment. Prior to that, he can only move the flow in one direction, and is thus not a full participant of events in the sense that a person who has reached psychological adulthood is...

One thing it would explain, is how some people might associate the Fe function with positive movements, whereas the other might see it as a tool of holding back negative movements, thus associating them with 'ethics', where the other would think of it as 'open minded accomodation'.
Yes, we are definitely thinking along the same "lines", on this. There is a lot of information in this post that I will need to come back to. I've got to rest up for an exam now, though.

But yes, I agree that the transcendental function is conscious control of the 2nd function set of a block. Although I question whether the 2nd function of the ego block's 2nd set is accessible consciously.... What would it mean for the entire 2nd set to be conscious?

It would seem to me that one would be moving events toward an unknown future, if that were the case.... But if was consciously available also, then one would be moving the world towards a definite future that one was consciously aware of.

And let's say the was in control... what would that entail?