# Valued functions



## Pinina (Jan 6, 2015)

In MBTI, I'm a pretty obvioud ESTJ.
A couple of weeks ago, I took a socionics-test and it turned out to show ESTp. I was very suprised, so I started to read a bit about both socionics and both the types, and saw that both the descriptions fit pretty well. I also read a bit about model A (correct me if I make any misstakes), and if I understood it correctly, ESTp and ESTj has the same strength of their functions, they just value them differently. But what I can't fully grasp, is what these "valued functions" mean. What would the differences be between an ESTp and an ESTj be? Does the valued functions mean that we like using them?


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

ESTps or SLEs value Se, Ni, Fe and Ti, and ESTjs or LSEs value Te, Si, Ne and Fi.


----------



## Pinina (Jan 6, 2015)

Entropic said:


> ESTps or SLEs value Se, Ni, Fe and Ti, and ESTjs or LSEs value Te, Si, Ne and Fi.


Yes, that I know. But according to model A, isn't Se in LSE as strong as Te, if I've understood it right. But Te is valued. What does that mean?


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Pinina said:


> In MBTI, I'm a pretty obvioud ESTJ.
> A couple of weeks ago, I took a socionics-test and it turned out to show ESTp. I was very suprised, so I started to read a bit about both socionics and both the types, and saw that both the descriptions fit pretty well. I also read a bit about model A (correct me if I make any *misstakes*), and if I understood it correctly, ESTp and ESTj has the same strength of their functions, they just value them differently. But what I can't fully grasp, is what these "valued functions" mean. What would the differences be between an ESTp and an ESTj be? Does the valued functions mean that we like using them?


There is one for starters. It's spelled mistake.

Valued functions are: 1st, 2nd, 5th, 6th. 1st and 2nd are your strongpoints and 5th and 6th are strongpoints of your dual. Your 2nd is emitted in your environment so as to your dual could pick it up and patch their 6th. It's all quite logical.

edit: yes, both Se and Te are equally strong in LSE. But there is one other difference: Te is conscious and Se is unconscious. Meaning you pay attention to one while you just do the other..


----------



## westlose (Oct 9, 2014)

Both LSE and SLE are sensors and thinkers.

But yet their ego are different; LSE is Te-Si and SLE is Se-Ti.

The ego-block represent functions which are part of your conscious psyche, and will define yourself. The base functions will be the core of your psyche. These functions are valued, which means that you will use them most of the time, and will enjoy it.

The super-ego block represent functions which are conscious too, but unvalued. These functions are a source of pain and frustration. You're bad at it and you know it. 

The super-id block is a set of unconscious functions, but deeply valued. They are what you secretly desire (especially the Dual-seeking function). You crave for these functions, because they complete your ego. So they are valued, but low.

The id-block is a set of unconscious and unvalued functions. You know very well how to use them, but they are in contradiction with your ego. So you will ignore them and find them annoying/not worth it.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

Pinina said:


> Yes, that I know. But according to model A, isn't Se in LSE as strong as Te, if I've understood it right. But Te is valued. What does that mean?


That's not model A but the dimensional theory. Strong isn't the same as valued. Valued is how you prefer to see and understand things, your actual outlook and what information you prefer to exchange with other people.


----------



## Pinina (Jan 6, 2015)

westlose said:


> The id-block is a set of unconscious and unvalued functions. You know very well how to use them, but they are in contradiction with your ego. So you will ignore them and find them annoying/not worth it.


Great descriptions of all the blocks, thanks! 
Is there any point where we might engage in our id-block, maybe just for fun? Or is it something we're allways trying to avoid?


----------



## To_august (Oct 13, 2013)

Pinina said:


> Great descriptions of all the blocks, thanks!
> Is there any point where we might engage in our id-block, maybe just for fun? Or is it something we're allways trying to avoid?


I don't think we really avoid our id-block. We're just sort of indifferent to it. It's not that interesting to engage in its usage. Demonstrative is quite visible and constitutes an important part of our outlook. It's nearly always turned on, without even us realizing it. 

Ignoring, is... yeah, it's just ignored. Since our base is the Biggest Boss, it pushes its counterpart deep into the unconsciousness, but as it shares the same judging or perceiving dichotomy as the base, it can not be truly weak. I read somewhere that we may engage in our ignoring as a defence mechanism once we encounter situation of informational conflict. When PoLR is activated or base fails to cope with a situation, our ignoring may take the stage and provide fresh perspective on the issue. As long as everything goes smoothly hardly anyone cares for their ignoring.


----------



## ALongTime (Apr 19, 2014)

Pinina said:


> Great descriptions of all the blocks, thanks!
> Is there any point where we might engage in our id-block, maybe just for fun? Or is it something we're allways trying to avoid?


You use all 8 functions all the time, but id functions tend to be more when you're not thinking about thinking; always there in the background and important but not part of your ego. When someone tries to engage your id functions it's boring, and with super-ego it's more annoying. There's probably a big difference between the functions as well, I would say 4 and 7 (PoLR and Ignoring) are by far the least valued (you'd actively avoid/hate using them) compared to 3 and 8 which are still not liked but not to such an extreme.


----------

