I summarized all of my thoughts concerning societal stability and jungian judging functions. I was going to email them to my two favorite ENTPs. The I asked myself why? Why do I need to show others my ideas? I enjoy the debate and discussion and enjoy new ideas but there is more than that. I think I seek their affirmation of my ideas, which they will always give as they do not approach social interactions in a critical fashion. I share with them as I have an emotional connection and trust them.
However this ends up being selfish of me. I burden them with having to emotional affirm me via my ideas which is rather impolite.
Thus I am going to collect them here. Here feels like a real diary given the millions of blogs that wonder by here. I can post, and thus post to myself. Meditation of a sort.
The ideas are skeletal. They need much work.
Four Judging functions:
Te-seeks to control external environment via domination, imposition of structure, efficiency. Decisions made by Te will be straightforward, blunt, even rude, often accompanied by hand movements to "box" the ideas in. If you violate the social heirchy via not submitting, punishment will be intense, dominating, even physical intimidation or confrontation until you back down or resolution is reached. A representative example would be the leader of the pack. Best deployed to control or structure groups or organizations in a strict hierchal way.
Fe- seeks to control external environment using defined set of social rules/customs/social reciprocal bonds. "I scratch your back, you scratch mine". If you violate the social rule set the punishment is exclusion. Initially it will be temporary, later permanent. These social reciprocal bonds are invisible, tenuous in nature and based upon the trust of mutual reciprococity. Primary or secondary Fe users are bound by these obligations and must abide as they form an internal code of ethics. Tertiary Fe users are not bound by the same level of mandatory reciprococity and can use the Fe social networks to leverage others and play social games. The rule seems to be that everyone is equal-if anyone tries to rise above that they get knocked back to an equal status. A representative example would be the stereotypical way women behave to each other. Best deployed to control organizations is a loose, network, diplomatic way.
Ti-an internal judgment, not about control. Based upon internally derived logical system-a Ti ruleset. A problem is observed, data is internalized-, ie the person mirrors the problem their mind, a Ti ruleset is applied to the data, the logical answer is derived, then the answer is externalized. Often a Ti user will have issues verbalizing the thought path leading to the conclusion. When they do, it will be very detailed, with precision being of utmost importance. Logical inconsistancies are not tolerated. The Ti ruleset is based upon logical facts the Ti users accumulates over a lifetime by learning and experimentation.
Fi-an internal judgment, not about control. Based upon an internally derived value system-an Fi ruleset. A problem is observed, data (the emotive state of the other person) is internalized, the data/emotive state is mirrored in the Fi user's emotions, the value derived logical answer is derived, then the answer is externalized. Often an Fi user will have issue verbalizing the emotive path that led to he decision. It will just be "right". The Fi ruleset is based upon value based observations the Fi user accumulates over a lifetime. For instance if they see an action, they observe it to cause pain to another, they then mirror/feel that pain themselves-thus the rule "action A is bad" has been formed.
