The tertiary placement seems to be quite ambiguous and hard to understand. The word itself literally means in 3rd place, which can create an inference that based on typology principles, any function-attitude in the 3rd placement must be weaker than the two preceding placements (dominant-auxiliary). This theory is usually followed by MBTI enthusiasts. The MBTI system also implies that the auxiliary placement will always be developed. Based on “Gifts Differing” one may easily infer that the auxiliary can be equal to or in the case of introverting types, at least give an appearance of being greater than the dominant function. This ambivalence is generally the result of discussions surrounding the J/P process.
MBTI System
The Myers-Briggs Foundation describes the hierarchy of placements this way:
Because MBTI associates the 3rd placed function with the inferior function. Many infer that any use of the 3rd function is a result of the inferior function and the use of the tertiary is negative and immature at best. This thought also implies that for the tertiary function to work, the auxiliary function must relinquish its power. That is vaguely true since theoretically the auxiliary and tertiary functions will be compensatory opposites. Therefore the more we use one function, the less we will use the other (on a sliding scale). When reading MBTI theory, one may infer that the dominant and auxiliary placements are conscious and differentiated.
Jungian Typology
Jungian enthusiasts such as John Beebe, refers to the tertiary placement as well. Like the four-letter codes we generally reference to allude to a particular type (ISTP, ENFP, etc.), the tertiary theory has become a staple in how we view the application of type. However unlike MBTI enthusiasts, Jungian Analysts indicate in their diagrams that the 2nd and 3rd functions are equal (or an axis), the auxiliary and tertiary functions are shown at the side as arms with equal usage, whereas the inferior function is at the bottom. This should give some indication that Jungian enthusiasts may believe the 2nd and 3rd functions are equal. Dr. Beebe refers to the 3rd function as the Puer Aeternus/Puella Aeterna function (aka Eternal Child). In his 8-model function study, Dr. Beebe describes the role in himself this way:
Practical Application
For the past couple of months, I have been reading bits and pieces of information to determine if there truly exists a viable understanding of how the 3rd placement works in relation to the second. Again there are those who believe the 3rd placement works for the inferior. This seems to contradict Dr. Jung’s theory since the inferior is not something we consciously uses, but something that just happens to us. I have no doubt that there may be information available to conclude how the 3rd placement works. Yet for now when discussing type, it seems apparent that any discussion of the 3rd function as a “tertiary”, is a discussion of MBTI, not Jungian. When discussing type using the Jungian method there is no evidence that a tertiary placement exists, but two equally applied functions. What does this mean in how we apply the theories? Going back to the dom-tert loop, this theory is most likely correct when applying the Myers & Briggs theory since the tertiary seems to be suppressed because of the auxiliary function.
Another conclusion may be made that when Jung referred to himself as being capitalized by thinking and using a great deal of intuition, it would infer he would be INTP as we know it. However when applying the Jungian theory, a dominant-tertiary loop cannot exists since as I have repeatedly indicated in the past that this would imply the dominant and tertiary functions will have to be close or equal to one another for the tertiary placement to consciously take over causing a recurring loop. This is in direct defiance of Jung’s principle of the auxiliary when saying:
MBTI System
The Myers-Briggs Foundation describes the hierarchy of placements this way:
The foundation describes the tertiary this way:One preference has the most influence on you. This is called the dominant function.
The next strongest preference is called the auxiliary function. It is important because it serves to support and balance the dominant.
The 3rd strongest is the tertiary function.
One preference is the least strong. This is the fourth function, often called the inferior function.
This theory again implies that we will have less use of the tertiary placed function than the auxiliary. MBTI enthusiasts who have written about this placement provide little information. In their books “Beside Ourselves” and “Personality Type: An Owner’s Manual”, Naomi Quenck and Lenore Thomson writes about the tertiary, explaining how the placement works in the MBTI system. However in a rewrite of her book titled “Was That Really Me?”,Dr. Quenck seems to defer her thoughts on this placement to how Jungian theorists see its usage. Dr. Quenck concludes that the role of the tertiary is ambivalent in varied systems. This is a reference to some theorists interpreting Jung to indicate a person using an introverting function to dominate will use all extraverting functions afterwards, and vice-versa for the extraverting type.The 3rd-preferred, or tertiary, function tends to be less interesting to individuals, and they tend to have fewer skills associated with it. The letter of this function does not appear in your type. It is the opposite function from the auxiliary function. If, for example, your auxiliary function is Thinking, then your tertiary will be Feeling.
Development of this function tends to come later in life (about midlife) after you have grown and feel comfortable with the dominant and auxiliary. As you grow and develop, you learn that there is a time and place to use your 3rd and fourth functions.
About this time, the question arises in life, is this all there is? The tertiary function can guide you toward areas of your life you have avoided, areas that require skills you do not feel comfortable using. For example, a Thinking type with tertiaryIntuition may begin taking literature courses. A Thinking type with tertiary Sensing may begin doing carpentry or weaving.
Because MBTI associates the 3rd placed function with the inferior function. Many infer that any use of the 3rd function is a result of the inferior function and the use of the tertiary is negative and immature at best. This thought also implies that for the tertiary function to work, the auxiliary function must relinquish its power. That is vaguely true since theoretically the auxiliary and tertiary functions will be compensatory opposites. Therefore the more we use one function, the less we will use the other (on a sliding scale). When reading MBTI theory, one may infer that the dominant and auxiliary placements are conscious and differentiated.
Jungian Typology
Jungian enthusiasts such as John Beebe, refers to the tertiary placement as well. Like the four-letter codes we generally reference to allude to a particular type (ISTP, ENFP, etc.), the tertiary theory has become a staple in how we view the application of type. However unlike MBTI enthusiasts, Jungian Analysts indicate in their diagrams that the 2nd and 3rd functions are equal (or an axis), the auxiliary and tertiary functions are shown at the side as arms with equal usage, whereas the inferior function is at the bottom. This should give some indication that Jungian enthusiasts may believe the 2nd and 3rd functions are equal. Dr. Beebe refers to the 3rd function as the Puer Aeternus/Puella Aeterna function (aka Eternal Child). In his 8-model function study, Dr. Beebe describes the role in himself this way:
Linda V. Berens and Dario Nardi also refer to the 3rd placement as tertiary, but has dubbed this placement as the “Relief Role” and describes it as:My introverted thinking was symbolised by a Father in one dream that found him in conflict with an upset feeling-type son, whom I eventually recognised as an image of my 3rd function. The particular son figure in the dream was a persistently im-mature man in analysis at the time, whose oscillation of woundedness and creativity fit well the description Marie Louise von Franz had given in her classic study of the ‘problem of the Puer Aeternus’ (1970), the Latin term referring to an eternal boyhood befitting an immortal. I decided that this dream was referring to an aspect of my own feeling that was inflated, vulnerable and chronically immature.
There are other analysts who have written about this placement as well. In her book “Jung’s Typology, Dr. von Franz never uses the word tertiary. Instead in Chapter IV called “The Role of the Inferior Function”, Dr. von Franz says, “As long as one has not developed the two auxiliary functions, they too will be open doors. In a person who has only developed one superior function, the two auxiliary functions will operate in the same way as the inferior function.” The analysis by Beebe, Berens/Nardi and von Franz come from Carl Jung’s “Psychological Type Theory”. In his theory, Dr. Jung also never refers to a tertiary function. Dr. Jung implies that we have auxiliary or a complimentary functions that are never antagonistic to the dominant function-attitude. Dr. Jung provides an example that sensing and intuiting can be auxiliaries for a thinking type, but never feeling. Dr. Jung also gives an example of how an ISTP or ESTJ will use the functions in saying:The relief role gives us a way to energize and recharge ourselves. It serves as a backup to the supporting role and often works in tandem with it. When we are younger, we might not engage in the process that plays this role very much unless our life circumstances require it or make it hard to use the supporting role process. Usually, in young adulthood we are attracted to activities that draw upon this process. The relief role often is how we express our creativity. It is how we are playful and childlike. In its most negative expression, this is how we become childish. Then it has an unsettling quality, and we can use this process to distract ourselves and others, getting us off target.
Many Jungian Analysts such as Dr. von Franz assert that the dominant and two auxiliary functions can be developed to a point of being differentiated or being able to stand alone, unlike the inferior function which will always need a more dominant function to work properly. These type functions are what Dr. Jung refers to as un-differentiated, because they cannot work on their own.A grouping of the unconscious functions also takes place in accordance with the relationship of the conscious functions. Thus, for instance, an unconscious intuitive feeling attitude (N-F) may correspond with a conscious practical intellect (T-S), whereby the function of feeling suffers a relatively stronger inhibition than intuition.
Practical Application
For the past couple of months, I have been reading bits and pieces of information to determine if there truly exists a viable understanding of how the 3rd placement works in relation to the second. Again there are those who believe the 3rd placement works for the inferior. This seems to contradict Dr. Jung’s theory since the inferior is not something we consciously uses, but something that just happens to us. I have no doubt that there may be information available to conclude how the 3rd placement works. Yet for now when discussing type, it seems apparent that any discussion of the 3rd function as a “tertiary”, is a discussion of MBTI, not Jungian. When discussing type using the Jungian method there is no evidence that a tertiary placement exists, but two equally applied functions. What does this mean in how we apply the theories? Going back to the dom-tert loop, this theory is most likely correct when applying the Myers & Briggs theory since the tertiary seems to be suppressed because of the auxiliary function.
Another conclusion may be made that when Jung referred to himself as being capitalized by thinking and using a great deal of intuition, it would infer he would be INTP as we know it. However when applying the Jungian theory, a dominant-tertiary loop cannot exists since as I have repeatedly indicated in the past that this would imply the dominant and tertiary functions will have to be close or equal to one another for the tertiary placement to consciously take over causing a recurring loop. This is in direct defiance of Jung’s principle of the auxiliary when saying:
This also gives us some insight as to what Jung may have been alluding to in describing himself. There has been debate that Jung was possibly ISTP because of how he described himself as a young person. Those who indicate he was ISTP, but changed to INTP later are seeing this transformation from the MBTI standard where Dr. Jung initially used Ti-Se then began using Ti-Ne. This implies he changed types. I propose a different explanation that remains consistent with Dr. Jung’s principles, in that, from the start to finish Dr. Jung dominated with Ti, developed his Se in younger years and then his Ni in midlife. Instead of limiting this process within the confines of there being only 16 types, it appears that based on his own principles Dr. Jung initially Ti-Se, then began using Ti-Ni. Dr. Jung prescribes to there being at least three distinct types in what we see as ISTP.This absolute sovereignty always belongs, empirically, to one function alone, and can belong only to one function, since the equally independent intervention of another function would necessarily yield a different orientation, which would at least partially contradict the first. But, since it is a vital condition for the conscious adaptation-process that constantly clear and unambiguous aims should be in evidence, the presence of a second function of equivalent power is naturally forbidden' This other function, therefore, can have only a secondary importance, a fact which is also established empirically. Its secondary importance consists in the fact that, in a given case, it is not valid in its own right, as is the primary function, as an absolutely reliable and decisive factor, but comes into play more as an auxiliary or complementary function.