The "odd" functions

[Tallmo]

Sensing, feeling, intuition and thinking can appear either extraverted or introverted. But because they change so much then it seems like one will feel odd or distant from it's own nature, or at least it can appear to us so. I picked the quotes from Jung that I found.


Si vs Se -> Si is odd

"Sensation, which in obedience to its whole nature is concerned with the object and the objective stimulus, also undergoes a considerable modification in the introverted attitude."


Fi vs Fe -> Fe is odd

"If one has always known feeling as a subjective fact, the nature of extraverted feeling will not immediately be understood, since it has freed itself as fully as possible from the subjective factor, and has, instead, become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object. Even where it seems to show a certain independence of the quality of the concrete object, it is none the less under the spell of traditional or generally valid standards of some sort."


Ti vs Te -> Ti is odd

"It might indeed be argued that a thinking whose aim is concerned neither with objective facts nor with general ideas scarcely merits the name 'thinking'. I am fully aware of the fact that the thought of our age, in common with its most eminent representatives, knows and acknowledges only the extraverted type of thinking. This is partly due to the fact that all thinking which attains visible form upon the world's surface, whether as science, philosophy, or even art, either proceeds direct from objects or flows into general ideas. On either ground, although not always completely evident it at least appears essentially intelligible, and therefore relatively valid. In this sense it might be said that the extraverted intellect, i.e. the mind that is orientated by objective data, is actually the only one recognized. "


Ni vs Ne -> Ne is odd(?)

I assume it is Ne that is odd, because it's an intuition detached from the subject, and we normally think of intuition as something subjective, "psychic" etc.

(I didn't find any quote here)

[adage]

So, gamma has the non-odd functions and alpha has all the odd ones.

Idk, I only thought of that as if you have Fe, Fi sounds weird and vice versa, I didn't consider one function would be more, idk, attuned to its direction. I mean, Fi being suggestive feelings and feelings being considered a subjective thing.
And Te being objective logic as we consider logic to be objective.
Oh, I think I get what you mean sort of.

Welp, this post is kind of useless because I'm not sure how to think of this but anyway, interesting to think about.

[Toro]

Sensing, feeling, intuition and thinking can appear either extraverted or introverted. But because they change so much then it seems like one will feel odd or distant from it's own nature, or at least it can appear to us so. I picked the quotes from Jung that I found.

Could you elaborate more on how these are considered odd? Is it dependent on the subjective preferences of an individual or are they inherently odd?

[Tallmo]

Could you elaborate more on how these are considered odd? Is it dependent on the subjective preferences of an individual or are they inherently odd?

No, it's not the subjective preference of the individual. It's more about that one attitude (E or I) seems to go against the general concept of the function or as we generally know it in society. I think the quotes explain it pretty well.

Typology shows that human cognition is more varied than we normally think. That could be one conclusion from this.

This also explains why some functions can be hard to understand.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

So quirky and odd "queer" owlkin alphas vs heteronormative normal normie cisgender Gammas.

[Tallmo]

I thought in Jungian Ni is harder to understand than Ne? This is based on posts from typology communities. N is already considered abstract and the “abstraction” intensifies with the introversion.

But overall I really don’t understand oddness in this context

Yes. But Ni as subjective "inner" intuition is more in line with the general conception of intuition than Ne (objective intuition). Or so I would claim.

[Toro]

No, it's not the subjective preference of the individual. It's more about that one attitude (E or I) seems to go against the general concept of the function or as we generally know it in society. I think the quotes explain it pretty well.

Typology shows that human cognition is more varied than we normally think. That could be one conclusion from this.

This also explains why some functions can be hard to understand.

If were talking about the perception of society on one or another function then what's the use in quoting Jung? That was the cause of my confusion.

Well, the problem I pointed to in my previous question was that one person may find a function "odd" where another understands it perfectly well.

So if a function is "odd" it is hard to understand for a majority of the population, so what are the qualities that make it so?

[Tallmo]

If were talking about the perception of society on one or another function then what's the use in quoting Jung? That was the cause of my confusion.

Jung is the one who points this out and has drawn my attention to this. That we have biases doesn't mean that we are aware of it or that we understand the distinctions.

Well, the problem I pointed to in my previous question was that one person may find a function "odd" where another understands it perfectly well.

Of course. People have different knowledge of things. But generally speaking a certain view (or bias) of a function (S, N, F, T) seems to rule, at least in everyday language. For example, "sensing" is generally seen as "objective", or being in touch with reality, but this is a problematic view if you want to understand Si. It is still sensing, but it's more the impression that is sensed, than the actual object.

So if a function is "odd" it is hard to understand for a majority of the population, so what are the qualities that make it so?

Probably because typology works out very fine distinctions so then something will go against everyday conceptions of things (that are usually not so fine). This is common in many fields.

Like S and N are in some sense opposites, so in everyday language maybe one is more associated with the objective side of reality and the other more with the subjective side of reality. But typology teaches us differently. Also see Jung's explanations above.

[Metaphor]

Not sure with what do you mean by odd, they looked fine to me unless you were intended to be known as odd, but who knows.
By the way, never meant to say that you are odd or intended to put an ad-hominem here, but I just didn't get what you were talking about.

[Metaphor]

They probably meant that Ni doesn't seem to have the "oddness" as in peculiar perception of environment unlike Si according to Jungian, but we know that Ni is basically surrealism. Also, I'd argue that Ne is more of an intuition that can predict future more than Ni but this is just pointless.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

The dark side of this theory to me is it's just going to make unhealthy power-trippy Gammas get superiority complexes that they are the most naturally "correct" quadra and then proceed to put other quadras into concentration camps. Or the reverse: Allow unhealthy alphas to play victim and hurt others out of undeserved 'innocence.'

I know I'm taking this a bit to ahem emotionally ((ethical type)) but nobody *truly* likes thinking of themselves as odd because the odd one out is the one that is always bullied and marginalized. That is why all successful advocacy programs have been for integrating the supposed 'odd' person with the majority. This gets confused as a pejorative and 'SJW' - but mostly that's just whining from the non-odd ones that they can no longer feel holier-than-thou from something they didn't have control in the first place.

[The Reality Denialist]

So alpha is odd.

Ne as I understand makes other feel its oddness. Ne is not removed - it is really piercing and intensely so (compare it Ni that merely observes and gets stimuli that way) since it is actively doing it but disregards the tangible object. I don't feel weird but other people certainly think I am.

[Number 9 large]

Ti vs Te -> Ti is odd

"It might indeed be argued that a thinking whose aim is concerned neither with objective facts nor with general ideas scarcely merits the name 'thinking'. I am fully aware of the fact that the thought of our age, in common with its most eminent representatives, knows and acknowledges only the extraverted type of thinking. This is partly due to the fact that all thinking which attains visible form upon the world's surface, whether as science, philosophy, or even art, either proceeds direct from objects or flows into general ideas. On either ground, although not always completely evident it at least appears essentially intelligible, and therefore relatively valid. In this sense it might be said that the extraverted intellect, i.e. the mind that is orientated by objective data, is actually the only one recognized. "

I dont like the reasoning of jung behind Ti being the odd function. He says its odd because it doesnt proceeds from objects or flow into ideas, but thats wrog because Ti is always either paired with se or Ne lol.

[ILoveChinchillas]

Kind of reminds me of a piece a read a while back about the objectivity levels of functions.

Se gets 3 points for being perceiving, extraverted, and concrete.
Te gets 2 points for being thinking and extraverted.
Ne gets 2 points for being extraverted and perceiving.
Fe gets 1 point for being extraverted.
Ti gets 1 point for being thinking.
Ni gets 1 point for being perceiving.
Si gets 2 points for being perceiving and concrete.

According to this logic, ESTps and ESTjs are the most objective types.

[Tallmo]

To summarize

The pattern behind this:

S is commonly associated with the object,
N with the subject

T is commonly associated with the object,
F with the subject

Hence, odd functions are:

Subjective sensing (Si)
Objective intuition (Ne)
Subjective thinking (Ti)
Objective feeling (Fe)

[Exodus]

internal XOR introverted = Alpha (values)

Introversion means subjective according to Jung, internal means subjective in socionics, this is the origin of the confusion here (which we have discussed before and I don't intend to discuss again).

While there may be some sense in saying that they are more similar than the opposite matching, the implications will be different if you actually use socionics definitions.

In fact, all of the extroverted elements are odd in how they cause movement or change. Change is contradiction.

[myresearch]

According to socionics, Ti isn't subjective, it is objective. Objectivity is propertiy of Ti, not Te. This is such a spreaded MBTI misconception, can anyone share a source if they think this is right?

This is from G's book:

LII:
1. Command Function —L — Structural Logic She gives anobjective, often impartial assessment of their potential.

ESI:
3. Role Function -L — Structural LogicShe strives to analyze situations from all sides and draw objective,unambiguous conclusions.

EII:
3. Role Function -L — Structural Logic
Eli strives to understand thesituation objectively, analyzing the facts without emotions; however, it isdifficult for her to express her understanding of a problem in analyticallanguage.

ESE:
6. Dual Function -L — Structural Logic
He is calmed by an objective, impartialanalysis of confusing situations, preferring to work out specific steps to betaken on his own.


Ti and Te descriptions:

Ti:

objective, outwardly measurable relationships between objects - laws, regulations, rules, categories, quantifiable properties, logic, analysis, belonging, authorship, hierarchy, subordination, objective judgments
Positive(short range):
Reality, detail, detailed study, carefulness, severity, place in hierarchies, laws, decisions, instructions, a choice of the best variant, logic of the organization, Negative (long range):
abstraction, generality, universality, system, classification, typology, the general laws, objectivity, true, validity, the analysis, logic of a science, criteria.

Te:

external activity of object - actions, events (what, how, where), facts, activity or work, algorithms, procedures, logic of objects’ measurable outward behavior
Positive(short range):
Advantage, benefit, profitability, technology, the facts, purchases, accumulation, the purchase, savings, putting in order, a practicality;
Negative (long range):
Uselessness, unprofitableness, use, application, deterioration, charges, expenditure, risk, experiment, sale, trade, actions in conditions of chaos, an ingenuity.

[The Reality Denialist]

According to socionics, Ti isn't subjective, it is objective. Objectivity is propertiy of Ti, not Te. This is such a spreaded MBTI misconception, can anyone share a source if they think this is right?

This is from G's book:

LII:
1. Command Function —L — Structural Logic She gives anobjective, often impartial assessment of their potential.

ESI:
3. Role Function -L — Structural LogicShe strives to analyze situations from all sides and draw objective,unambiguous conclusions.

EII:
3. Role Function -L — Structural Logic
Eli strives to understand thesituation objectively, analyzing the facts without emotions; however, it isdifficult for her to express her understanding of a problem in analyticallanguage.

ESE:
6. Dual Function -L — Structural Logic
He is calmed by an objective, impartialanalysis of confusing situations, preferring to work out specific steps to betaken on his own.


Ti and Te descriptions:

Ti:

objective, outwardly measurable relationships between objects - laws, regulations, rules, categories, quantifiable properties, logic, analysis, belonging, authorship, hierarchy, subordination, objective judgments
Positive(short range):
Reality, detail, detailed study, carefulness, severity, place in hierarchies, laws, decisions, instructions, a choice of the best variant, logic of the organization, Negative (long range):
abstraction, generality, universality, system, classification, typology, the general laws, objectivity, true, validity, the analysis, logic of a science, criteria.

Te:

external activity of object - actions, events (what, how, where), facts, activity or work, algorithms, procedures, logic of objects’ measurable outward behavior
Positive(short range):
Advantage, benefit, profitability, technology, the facts, purchases, accumulation, the purchase, savings, putting in order, a practicality;
Negative (long range):
Uselessness, unprofitableness, use, application, deterioration, charges, expenditure, risk, experiment, sale, trade, actions in conditions of chaos, an ingenuity.

Ti conclusions however are prone to bias. Usually Ti base does not verify. Few examples : Vladimir Putin, John Nash.



Ti demo fails to consider so called non logical actions.

[myresearch]

Ti conclusions however are prone to bias.

Everyone can have a bias, I am saying Ti is defined by objective whereas Te isn't by different socionics theorists.

Usually Ti base does not verify. Few examples : Vladimir Putin, John Nash.

John Nash is officially diagnosed and about Putin, well, I don't want him to be main subject of topic, but what he does and says caused by different things than his Ti imo. We can find people like those from all types.

[Tallmo]

According to socionics, Ti isn't subjective, it is objective. Objectivity is propertiy of Ti, not Te. This is such a spreaded MBTI misconception, can anyone share a source if they think this is right?

I am using Jungian terminology. Ti is subjective, like all introverted functions. You can look up the definitions in Psychological types if you want to study what it means

[The Reality Denialist]

Everyone can have a bias, I am saying Ti is defined by objective whereas Te isn't by different socionics theorists.




John Nash is officially diagnosed and about Putin, well, I don't want him to be main subject of topic, but what he does and says caused by different things than his Ti imo. We can find people like those from all types.

Yes but their craziness is the manifestation of extreme non cross verification. Russian has two words for truth so be careful (colored truth for personal benefit and opposite of a lie)

[myresearch]

I am using Jungian terminology. Ti is subjective, like all introverted functions. You can look up the definitions in Psychological types if you want to study what it means

I read the book years ago. Socionics has evolved from there. I am taking this as you don't disagree with what I shared, just use the word in a different way.

Yes but their craziness is the manifestation of extreme non cross verification. Russian has two words for truth so be careful (colored truth for personal benefit and opposite of a lie)

I think main issue isn't lack of cross verification. One of them is diagnosed and assesing Putin as an example of Ti is a great way to get off topic and explaining this behaviors in terms of Ti alone can cause us to assess things in wrong way.

[Tallmo]

I read the book years ago. Socionics has evolved from there. I am taking this as you don't disagree with what I shared, just use the word in a different way.

Yes, it's about terminology. But I think Jung has better terminology, but I can't go into it here. But in this thread I was using Jung's terminology because the quotes are from him, and it's related to this idea of "odd" functions, or whatever we should call it.

Socionics has evolved from there.

You can say Socionics has evolved from there (the ITR, the weak function). But Jung has imo much better descriptions of functions and many other things that we need to know and that Socionics doesn't mention.

[Ryan]

Odd is such a useless criteria, isn't? I'm inclined to agree with you OP since only you know what you mean by odd in this context, but where do we go from here? It's like rating functions in terms of gayness. It's a fun exercise but ultimately useless?

[adage]

For some reason, I think of sensing as subjective, so Se is the odd one to me.
Probably because remember a lot of people closing their to "sense their body" or idk what. It never made a lot of sense in my head. I have the image of a woman in particular who I think is SEI.

The way I see feelings is as stuff you throw at people, no need to feel anything or make a lick of sense, just show feelings and you're good. So Fi is odd.

Idk about logic, seems like logic itself is odd and should be burried somewhere far away.

Intuition seems wasted if it isn't used to amuse people. Idk what to make of this.

I think this is pretty much cultural in my case.

[ILoveChinchillas]

The really "odd" part is that Jung considered functions he himself probably preferred to be "odd."

[Tallmo]

Odd is such a useless criteria, isn't? I'm inclined to agree with you OP since only you know what you mean by odd in this context, but where do we go from here? It's like rating functions in terms of gayness. It's a fun exercise but ultimately useless?

Not at all useless. This tells us how typology broadens the cognitive horizon by its finer distinctions. It contrasts our culture's view on cognition with typology.

but where do we go from here?

We can begin by questioning our own understanding of the "odd" functions. And study them more and hopefully understand them better. And in that way maybe understand ourselves and other people better.

Btw: I just thought "odd" would be a fitting word. You can come up with something else if it suits you better.

[ILoveChinchillas]

So alpha is odd.

Ne as I understand makes other feel its oddness. Ne is not removed - it is really piercing and intensely so (compare it Ni that merely observes and gets stimuli that way) since it is actively doing it but disregards the tangible object. I don't feel weird but other people certainly think I am.

I view Ni as the peircing one because it's about depth and asking questions like "Why?" Ne skims along the surface with breadth, on the other hand.

Ni doesn't disregard the object because it's a perceiving function. Ie. It's primary aim is apprehending the object unfiltered. It's just more in that it builds abstractions and subjective impressions* of "alternate objects", you could say.

*Not to be confused with impressionism or Si impressions.

[ILoveChinchillas]

Jung: starting quadra wars before it was cool.

[AWellArmedCat]

All "odd" really means in this context is that the mechanical qualities of the element appear somewhat contrary to the name of the dichotomy they belong to - or at least more so compared to their non-odd counterparts. I think because most people don't have as clear of an idea of what "intuition" is supposed to mean, neither Ni nor Ne really come across as uniquely ill-fitting of the label of "intuition" as most people understand it. I would guess that's why Jung didn't bother mentioning it.

Anyways, thanks for posting. This can be useful to keep in mind in order to more concretely understand the elements

[Tallmo]

All "odd" really means in this context is that the mechanical qualities of the element appear somewhat contrary to the name of the dichotomy they belong to - or at least more so compared to their non-odd counterparts.

I am the one responsible for calling the functions "odd". I just needed to call it something when starting this thread. Jung never talks about "odd" functions. I just want to point this out.

I think because most people don't have as clear of an idea of what "intuition" is supposed to mean, neither Ni nor Ne really come across as uniquely ill-fitting of the label of "intuition" as most people understand it. I would guess that's why Jung didn't bother mentioning it.

Right. I agree, although I'd still like to say Ni is closer to what "intuition" is expected to be. I think people generally would call Ne "openness" or "being inventive" or something like that. (not "intuition"). It also fits the pattern, since S is associated more with the object, so N should be associated with the subject, and that makes Ne "odd". But this is maybe making it all too formal, and maybe it's wrong and your view is the correct one.

[nochturne]

I dont like the reasoning of jung behind Ti being the odd function. He says its odd because it doesnt proceeds from objects or flow into ideas, but thats wrog because Ti is always either paired with se or Ne lol.

Jung himself never specified Ti being paired with Pe. In his writing the “functions” themselves were the types, so Ti was a type on it’s own. He did mention that judging types can be further differentiated by the leading perceiving function (N or S as the letters without i or e were originally the functions) and vice versa but never concretely specified the attitude (what would be i vs e). People who rely purely on Jung for typing usually write the types as Ti-S or Ti-N because of this.
https://www.typologycentral.com/thre...lained.108922/
Although I think what you're saying could still be applied here since there's still connection with N and S, but I think Jung meant that logic is often associated with observing both N and S objectively (as in with an extraverted attitude) and since Ti lacks the objective quality that's often associated with logical things/people, it seems more strange.

[Metaphor]

He did mention about Ti-Pi pairing but I really don't think that's significant to the point of this conversation. While it's arguably true that Jungian and Socionics aren't necessarily the same thing despite being similar, it still has connections to the Informational Elements as well.

[Metaphor]

Ni is more than often questions of their existence, Sartre's "Being and Nothingness" kind of much is Ni's ambiguousness in a nutshell.

[Metaphor]

Despite it's not being useless, it's clearly redundant and therefore arbitrary. No need to add an already complex system with mere "definitions" of each being "odd" while it's not being that exactly applicable to the IMEs. In other words, this is just the waste of potentials to become any practical. Ergo, it's a counter-productive way to understand the system and instead of going forwards, it does the opposite.

[AWellArmedCat]

I am the one responsible for calling the functions "odd". I just needed to call it something when starting this thread. Jung never talks about "odd" functions. I just want to point this out.

Yeah, I know. I was explaining that for others who seemed confused by your wording.

Right. I agree, although I'd still like to say Ni is closer to what "intuition" is expected to be. I think people generally would call Ne "openness" or "being inventive" or something like that. (not "intuition"). It also fits the pattern, since S is associated more with the object, so N should be associated with the subject, and that makes Ne "odd". But this is maybe making it all too formal, and maybe it's wrong and your view is the correct one.

Yes, I agree with you. Hence why I liked your comment in which you said as much lol

I totally get what you meant by this post. I'm not real sure what some other people aren't seeing. I've long thought almost the exact same thing about certain information elements seeming to be more in line with their expected nature than others

[Alomoes]

Here's the problem, by definition, odd is entirely subjective and circumstantial. It's honestly a meaningless statement to say one function is more odd than the other considering that my emotional state is entirely dynamic, and one day I feel in touch with my understanding of the world, and the other, I feel like I just shat the bed. Nothing to do with interpersonal relations or whether I'm in pain or not today, rather, more to do with my understanding of my performance of the day as a human being, I believe. Entirely the weirdest concept (to me) that I've learned about myself over the past year.

Most days, I entirely feel like my body is melting, and I'm slowly becoming one with the universe to the point where my body doesn't exist. And then I stand up and suddenly, I notice my foot is asleep, and then I have to sit there for 20 minutes making it not asleep so I don't feel that sensation anymore, because I hate that.

Is that odd?

[ILoveChinchillas]

@Tallmo do you think Jung's biases here speak to him being Alpha quadra? Ie. Did he view himself as an oddball?

He never really gave a straight answer as to what his type was, and a lot of people think he was IEI. But the more I think about his writings, the more I think he was Ji base. He had a need to subordinate everything to his own logic. Maybe all this interest in the occult, mysticism, etc. speaks to demo Ni? Also, a lot of his writing seems pseudo-dialectical. Was it really holographic panoramic cognition?

[Aster]

Ni & Ti are maybe the odd or ‘weird’ functions imo, but it depends what one defines as weird. And when.

but yeah that means betas would be the weirdest ones, and that makes sense

[Aster]

Ni & Ti are maybe the odd or ‘weird’ functions imo, but it depends what one defines as weird. And when.

but yeah that means betas would be the weirdest ones, and that makes sense

had to lol