• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Developing Functions


Local time
Today, 14:46
Oct 27, 2010
I seem to be puzzled with the thought of "Developing Functions".

Obviously I've seen this post:
(and my own:)

And I've come to realize certain rules that are quite obvious but needed to be stated.
I called them "Laws of Development".
Each “law” is a proposition with a theoretical proof (as in, by the definitions of MBTI).

"Laws of Development"
Basis #1: "Jung's typological model regards psychological type as similar to left or right handedness: individuals are either born with, or develop, certain preferred ways of thinking and acting."
Interpretation: A person would often automatically use his preferred psyche type and might even take it for granted.
For example it’s like being right-handed: you automatically prefer it, because you used it all your life – but if you try and use your second hand for the same actions you’d see you would eventually switch to your preferred hand without even noticing.

Basis #2: "…people tend to find using their opposite psychological preferences more difficult, even if they can become more proficient (and therefore behaviorally flexible) with practice and development."
Interpretation: Different functions can be practiced and developed but it would be difficult for a person to actually do that, as it is acting against his own “nature” (the preferred type).

==========The Laws==========

Law #1: If you try to develop a function you need to be constantly aware of the development.

Proof: Our preferred type is by definition “preferred”, and thus if we do our regular day-to-day work then we would automatically try and use our dominant functions first.
If you were trying for example to exercise a different function then you would have to be fully aware of the process of development.
As your awareness fades so is your usage of the function you’re trying to develop and your preferred type functions prevail once again and they stop the process of development.

Analogy: Developing your left-hand if you’re right-handed, and developing your right-hand if you’re left-handed. If you are not aware to the process of development you will start using your default hand once-again.

Law #2: The state of function development is temporary.

Proof: If you were to develop your function indefinitely without your “energy” draining (no loss of focus), or it becomes your default function, then by definition, it is your dominant function.

For further explanation: if your function development is continued forever then you are constantly aware of the development and you don’t spend energy on it, which means you are comfortable with it. You can only be comfortable with a function if it is your default one.

Law #3: Using your non-dominant function is developing it (and thus, when using it, both of the above laws are applied).

Proof: Every time you use your functions you develop it, because you experience it.

Law #1: You need to be constantly aware of the usage – otherwise you’d use your default function.
Law #2: You cannot use your non dominant function forever – otherwise it is your dominant function.

Law #4: Even the slightest distraction from developing your function can result in your dominant functions coming back into action. The more drastic the distraction and the more short-spanned it is, the more you are convinced you are still developing your functions

Explanation: The “sliding” effect is a shift of focus away from the function you are trying to develop towards your dominant function in such a way that you might not even notice that you are using different functions although you might still be convinced in a conscious way that you are developing the function you chose. This mainly happens when you lose focus.

Proof: If your focus disappears entirely on the process in-hand then your dominant functions are immediately return into the dominant functions, but you might still have the illusion that everything is still under control.

The more short-spanned the distraction is, the more confidence you have that you’re still “in-game”.
The more drastic the distraction is, the more focus you lose.
I'd be happy if you were to help me develop the theory behind this. I'd like to have some counter-ideas as well. (Probably going to post the complete more detailed laws in my tumbler later)
What are your ideas towards this?
Top Bottom