Basildon said:
According to Jung, you cannot be both Te and Fe at the same time because those functions are in opposition (they would compete with each other for judgment). The functions exist in the order they exist for a reason. An extraverted judging function has a corresponding introverted judging function...An introverted perceiving function has a corresponding extraverted perceiving function. If you are Te-auxiliary, then that means you chose to leave feeling introverted (Fi)...ditto for Fe vs. Ti...both extraverted Judging functions trying to express themselves simultaneously in the same "space" would likely elicit confused judgment. The face that such an individual presented to the world would likely be seen as convoluted and irresolute.
Actually the funny thing is this has caught on, but shows how much the theory of functions has undergone modifications in focus since Jung. If you look up a famous Jungian analyst named John Beebe, it is in his theory that the tertiary and auxiliary alternate in orientation (if one is introverted, the other is extraverted).
CG Jung would've said in many say, introverted thinking types, the rest of the functions could be all extraverted, i.e. "Ne, Se, and Fe", and this was also Isabel Myers' bias, except she focused on individuals with a developed secondary function only, not ones with only a developed dominant.
It's understandable that you think this is Jung's view, since you'd expect a famous Jungian analyst to perhaps have parallel views. However, there isn't agreement among them on how to type people.
The reason for this is that, in reality, Jung viewed the primary thing being the attitudes of introversion/extraversion, and the functions were at most a sub-expression of those things --- so in his model, the psyche doesn't alternate. He would say the conscious psyche is introverted in an introvert, and everything else is extraverted. The dominant function thus attains the introverted attitude, but the rest may all be extraverted.
Also, when you speak of Te and Fe being used "in the same domain" roughly, well in Jung's view, to the extent someone develops Te, they actually repress Fi the MOST. Because, quite simply, thinking and feeling are opposed in his theory, and introversion and extraversion are also opposed in his theory. Just because feeling is introverted doesn't mean it somehow doesn't conflict with thinking anymore --- and why would it be so?
The big difference is you might be thinking, extraverted functions "deal with the outer world" so as long as you don't "deal with the outer world" using feeling, and deal only with the inner world using feeling, there's no conflict --- Te can do its business in the outer world, and feeling can do its business in the inner world.
But, the subtle points here:
-- you do not have to "deal with the outer world" using an extraverted function in Jung's typology. You do in the Myers-Briggs outlook. In Jung, extraversion means you are merely exhibiting a greater
focus on the outer world, but it doesn't mean that to think introvertedly, you can ignore objects entirely in favor of the subjective. Rather, it is merely a predominance of your interest in the subject which deems the function introverted. This means that you can deal with the object using a function which you prefer to use in an introverted way --- merely in your dealings with the object, always you'll bring things back to connect to the subject.
-- feeling and thinking deal with different realms anyway. That is, Fe and Te don't deal with the same kinds of judgments generally --- sometimes feelings are more relevant. Sometimes thoughts more relevant. Many times when making a heavily value-based determination, feelings are most crucial. If one makes such determinations, and considers the outside above all, then that becomes extraverted. The question of Te interfering? Well, if it does, that means feeling isn't developed enough to stand up for itself, as in for instance a dominant Te type. In these types, feeling gets pushed to the repressed unconscious personality which is why it attains the
rejected attitude of introversion.
A more modern MBTI theorist Dario Nardi also makes note that Myers differed from modern practice in how she ordered functions
Dario Nardi said:
This model does not work for everyone, and diverges slightly from Myer’s original hypothesis, which switches the third and seventh functions. This switch was proposed by Harold Grant and others in 1983 and many find it true. Grant proposed that functions develop one after another over a lifetime following this sequence. This model has caught on but seems to miss something.
The model you speak of is not due to Jung, but to Harold Grant, and it was also taken off with by John Beebe, (my guess being) because he felt it better matched his psyche and /or made more intuitive sense to him.
