Functianalyst

….. or XSTP….. or IXXP… or….. Heard this before? When we refer to X’s in our type codes, we again are attempting to incorporate dichotomies into a process that is completely fluid. Instead of claiming that I changed types, or must use an X the plain and simple truth is that I shifted to another function to allow another process to take over for the moment. Jung explains this process as well in his first few sentences:

The relation between subject and object, considered biologically, is always a relation of adaptation, since every relation between subject and object presupposes mutually modifying effects from either side. These modifications constitute the adaptation. The typical attitudes to the object, therefore, are adaptation processes….. Nature knows two fundamentally different ways of adaptation, which determine the further existence of the living organism the one is by increased fertility, accompanied by a relatively small degree of defensive power and individual conservation; the other is by individual equipment of manifold means of self-protection, coupled with a relatively insignificant fertility. This biological contrast seems not merely to be the analogue, but also the general foundation of our two psychological modes of adaptation, At this point a mere general indication must suffice; on the one hand, I need only point to the peculiarity of the extravert, which constantly urges him to spend and propagate himself in every way, and, on the other, to the tendency of the introvert to defend himself against external claims, to conserve himself from any expenditure of energy directly related to the object, thus consolidating for himself the most secure and impregnable position.

In other words, I am not now XSTP, I merely adapted to a situation and now using Se. The same goes when I use my Ni and Fe.

For those who are new to the forum, but have at least a couple of hundred posts under your belt, you should know dichotomies are: E/I, S/N, T/F, J/P. When put to use we refer to them as codes, i.e. I-S-T-P. ISTP is merely a title, no different than other titles like the Mechanic, the Crafter, the Analyzer Observer, ISTj or any other title referring to someone preferring particular function hierarchy.

Here lies the problem. These letters have absolutely no functional purpose, but to provide name for a type. No real purpose or value can be considered when using dichotomies. E and I are attitudes that give direction to how we prefer to use our energy, outward toward the object (E) or inward toward the Self (I). Without a function, this is merely a vacant vessel waiting for connection to give it purpose. That requires a function. For those who are aware what function means, this is for those who may be struggling. S and N are perceiving functions that allow us to process information. And T and F are judging functions with a purpose of making decisions. The functions cannot work without E/I to give direction inward or outward.

Q: Oops, you missed two, J/P!

A: No J/P are not functions, they’re dichotomies. Judging (J) and Perceiving (P) are sub-categories derived by Jung to distinguish the functions. Other than that they serve no purpose except to help one discover their overall four-letter code. As I have said on many occasions, these two letters are redundant in that they merely repeat what we already know from the second and third letters, that we extravert with the second letter (S/N) if a “P” or the third letter (T/F) if a “J”. That’s it. I had introduced in the past, list of codes that can easily substitute the existing codes as we know them without the use of the J/P code:

INTP = Ti-Ne = ITN
ISTP = Ti-Se = ITS
INTJ = Ni-Te = INT
ISTJ = Si-Te = IST
ENFP= Ne-Fi = ENF
ENFJ = Fe-Ni = EFN
And so on……….

Myers and Briggs did not intend for people to try and use her dichotomies as an applicable means. MB and her enthusiasts referred to the functional hierarchy as illustrated below here:



As you can see, the functions for ISTP are T-S-N-F. This at least gives it’s user an idea of which functions actually come into play. However TSNF is confusing since two types use that hierarchy ISTP and ESTJ. Essentially there are 8 hierarchies for all the types. What distinguishes ISTP and ESTJ are the directions of energy. As a result ISTP = Ti-Se-Ni-Fe and ESTJ = Te-Si-Ne-Fi. This is what makes them completely different types. The same goes for the others as well. As a result now there instantly become 16 types.

Another more basic understanding in the use or misuse of Xs stems from simply not knowing our temperament. Frannyy started a thread recently on ISTJs catering to others. The inquiry made deserved a simple answer that all SJ types have serving others as one of their core values. No particular function came into play. Thanks for keeping us honest Frannyy, since I admit that I also became instantly caught up in the function process fervor. This is also indicative when I see people claiming to be IXTP, IXFP, IXTJ, ESXJ and so on. A simple clue that the confusion is most likely based on temperament preference is when the confusion surrounds actual functions, but not always since ISTX could stem from not knowing whether one prefers the Improviser or the Stabilizer temperament.