Scott 2 wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2023 9:22 am
I find exploration of the weaker expressions enriches life. As if they are latent capacities, waiting to be activated.
I agree that this kind of exploration both deepens and broadens perspectives. I would not go so far as to say they're latent capacities. Not everybody has an "inner Einsteinian genius" that just needs to be activated. It's more accurate to think of capacities as a combination of talent and focus. Insofar your brain rewards your activity with a given neurotransmitter, you're more likely to do more of that activity. And in turn, you're likely to get better at it. And being good at something is better than being bad at something or being effectively oblivious to it.
On the other hand, going against your own reward system is possibly a hellish experience depending on how strongly you go against it. Note that neurotransmitters have a Gaussian distribution. MBTI, for example, often inherently imply that these are bimodal with an "excluded middle": You're either this or that. But in reality, 68% are within one standard deviation on the transmitters... and then may or may not proceed to push themselves towards behavior that leads to the bimodal expression of personality. Then again, they may not---these are the ones who test all over the place.
Scott 2 wrote: ↑Sun May 28, 2023 9:22 am
My instinct is to flee groups as well. Making this concept feel especially foreign. But is the wiring fixed? Or am I avoiding new and stressful paths?
I lean towards the latter. I can be more of what I'm not. Seeking balance offers the rewards of low hanging fruit.
The wiring is fixed in the sense that the hardware is fixed. But you can run different software on it. To stretch the wiring analogy a bit. Extroverts have less sensitivity to dopamine than introverts, so there's more "resistance" in their wires and they therefore require a higher voltage to drive the same current. Conversely, the wires in an introvert are wide-open and so if subjective to the same sensory input, their wires are more likely to "burn out" if subjected to the same voltage as the extroverts. This means that it's harder for an introvert to engage in the same level of "outgoing activities" and still feel alright. Yet both can learn to be outgoing. It just feels less rewarding to be so for introverts.
For example, a career mathematician (strongest Ti preference) may compare the feeling when finding a proof for a theorem right right up there with the physical act of sex (Se, their weakest function). It is pretty hard for most humans to even begin to imagine finding that joy (or beauty) in experiencing a complicated logical construct that is comparable or better than sex, but at least people can try based on analogy.
There are two strategies. One is to play to your wiring and be the best you, you can be. The other is to play against your wiring to be the most externally well-rounded you can be; alternatively optimize yourself for your career or tribal demands. Your wiring basically determines what the ROI of your internal well-being is on exercising the cognitive functions. And how much you've exercised those functions determines your ROI in real life according to how those functions are valued societally(*). This means there are two aspects to this. For example, I (and I gather Sclass as well) have concluded that even if extroverted feeling is useful to engage with the world, it's simply not worth it to us compared to "investing" the effort in other cognitive functions like introverted thinking or intuition. (I have actually tried a few times in my life by now, but I always end up regretting it. I think it's a bit like if you're one of those unlucky people for whom cilantro tastes like soap, while everybody else constantly goes on about what a culinary experience this spice adds ... and you so you try it again ... and it still tastes like soap to you.)
(*) For example, being gregarious and "fun" is not nearly as valued in Finland as it is in the US.
I think the best way to use this knowledge is to invert the problem (always invert!) and ask. Ask if your former career or living situation somehow demand(ed) that you overexercise wiring that you really lacked the hardware for. For example, the introvert growing up in a noisy "fun-loving" family or the people-oriented person who somehow got into software and learned how to code because it looked like a good career at the time. In that case, freedom-to will make it possible to explore who (what) you actually are. (For example, I suspect some of the INTJs on this forum only test that way because they got into STEM where this kind of behavior is encouraged. Basically, this implies that their software is not optimized for their hardware and that they will likely be happier installing a different OS. In Plotkin language, they have some subpersonalities like "the scientist", "the taskmaster", and "the strategist" installed courtesy of their education and career history, that aren't part of their natural makeup. Thus when they take the test, it's those subpersonalities answering and not themselves.)