Can a Loop Be Healthy?
Ah, loops. I’ve been meaning to write about this for a while, but my head has been very distracted lately… Evident by the fact that I completely forgot to post yesterday, ha ha. Anyhow, I know loops (or “jumpers” as another theory calls them) are somewhat controversial, which means someone will probably get mad at this post, or at the very least, vehemently disagree. That seems to be the way of things. Of course, everyone is welcome to their opinion. This article, however, will be my opinion. (Or more accurately, mine and Ryan’s opinion, since we don’t actually publish anything on this blog that we both don’t agree with.)
First, what is a Loop?
Before the rambling begins, I should probably clarify what a loop is. A loop is when a person skips over their auxiliary function and gives priority to their tertiary function instead. This results in “looping” between one’s dominant and tertiary function without regard to the auxiliary. For example, an ISTP’s cognitive function stack in order of preference is Ti-Se-Ni-Fe. An ISTP in a loop would be using Ti-Ni primarily.
Time and time again, I run across people adamantly proclaiming that people are far too complex for the 16 boxes that this personality theory puts them in. When they focus in on the functions, they start proclaiming that they can’t be limited to the four functions that their type dictates. I’ve seen people literally pick and choose which functions they relate to and then list off a completely unique function stack that they believe themselves to possess. This mentality also happens to be the basic premise for what has become known as “jumpers.” In the theory, the ISTP that naturally prefers their Ni over Se would be considered a Ti-Ni rather than a Ti-Se. However, I have one major concern about this way of thinking: balance.
An in-depth look at my concern
I agree that people use varying ratios of the cognitive functions. For instance, let’s pretend that this is quantifiable in numbers and say that, an ISTP should naturally use 90%Ti 75%Se 25%Ni and 10%Fe.Let’s pretend that this is the default model for an ISTP. (Theoretically, reaching 50% on each function in a pair would mean balance, yeah? Try not to overthink my model, lol… I didn’t.) In my mind, every ISTP out there is not adhering to that model exactly, which is partially why there is such variance. For instance, maybe I’m over here with 95%Ti, 70%Se, 30%Ni, and 5%Fe. I may not be an exact match, but I’m following the model close enough to declare solidly that I am most definitely an ISTP. Right? Ok, so, in the world of my pretend model, these people that believe that looping is healthy are basically saying that 90%Ti, 25%Se, 75%Ni, and 10%Fe is a valid cognitive function stack. The most obvious problem that I see with that is the lack of extraverted function use.
Unfortunately, (speaking as an introvert), in life we have to interact with the rest of the world. We have to be productive… as in we must literally produce something within the external world in order to survive. (You like food, right?) We also have to be able to interact with people. An inability to do so can be quite handicapping. (I’m not sure if that’s a word, but I’m gonna roll with it.) The people who claim that looping can be healthy are basically saying that this is a state in life that is okay… whether they realize that’s what they’re saying or not. I disagree completely. We need to output externally in order to live. We also need a certain degree of human interaction, on an emotional and psychological level. Someone with low use on both of their extraverted functions is clearly going to struggle.
Next let me turn to the extraverts. I’ve seen people who are really heavy on their two extraverted functions… and it is NOT a good thing. An extravert who doesn’t stop to introspect will be constantly on the go, far too intense, reckless, rash, and etc. All the introverts around will shrivel at his presence, ha ha. You ever met the person who absolutely cannot shut up and dominates every single social situation? It never feels like you’re being listened to because they won’t hardly stop talking. It never feels like you can have a real conversation with them. They’re constantly taking action without thinking about the consequences or checking in with the people involved. They never seem to slow down. Etcetera. Neither the introvert nor the extravert scenario is a good thing.
Perhaps you consider yourself to be looping and to be healthy.
What then? Does that invalidate everything I just said because you don’t fit either scenario? Meh. I’ve got two responses to that.
1. It’s possible that the ratio in your stack is tipping in favor of your tertiary function, but you’re still getting by just fine.
You’re still functioning in life, and successful, generally speaking. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be striving to develop that extraverted function. One of the main values or benefits of personality theory is self-growth. If you’re truly far more introverted than extraverted and over-utilizing your introverted functions, relatively speaking, you should not simply accept that as the way you’re going to be for the rest of your life. Can you honestly look at yourself and say that you wouldn’t benefit from a bit of growth in the extraverted side of things? Can you honestly say that you never desire it? or never wish that you could just let loose a little? You should be constantly growing and developing through your life. To me, it seems only logical that a perfectly balanced personality would have equal use between their introverted and extraverted functions.
Now, what if you look at your life and disagree with everything I just stated above? What if you think you are balanced, yet still naturally lead with two introverted or extraverted functions? Well, that leads to my other problem…
2. A majority of the time, I believe that “healthy” loops are claimed due to a lack of accurate cognitive function knowledge.
I’ve seen some pretty wacked out descriptions out there. I’ve heard a lot of stereotypes and read a lot of misinformation. It’s very easy to get confused. It’s very easy to misunderstand what extraversion actually is, since it’s typically described as sociability or people-orientation. I see biases toward certain functions resulting in skewed information, or people claiming that they are something that they’re not. I see stuff that is not adding up or making sense. I see Ne and Ni get mixed up all the time. Ti is messed up constantly as well, which I’m particularly prone to noticing as a Ti dominant who happens to also be a sensor. (Ti is mixed into Ne descriptions a lot.) It’s all just a mess, and not a good mess like I mentioned in my last article, ha ha. When I see a supposed “healthy loop” (assuming it’s legitimate), they are typically explainable as either a misunderstanding of how the auxiliary function will actually surface or as a mistyping.
In conclusion…
When it comes to this subject, there is really one logical principle driving my opinion, if I haven’t yet made that clear. Logically speaking, everyone must achieve a balance between our external and internal worlds in order to truly be healthy. The closer we can get to that balance the better, which means there should not be a drastic leaning toward one world or the other. That is the primary, unforgivable flaw that I see in a theory of healthy looping. I hope this article made sense, and was at least somewhat thought provoking.
Hi there! If you enjoyed that article, leave us a quick comment to encourage us to keep writing, and check out our Updates and Current Projects. In addition, if you've found our content helpful, please consider Buying Us A Coffee to help keep this website running. Thank you!
Hi
It came as a surprise to me that there is a section that actually thinks that loops are healthy!! As you mentioned for growth its important to use and develop the auxillary function more than the tertiary function. One aspect (which you have mentioned in another article as well) why this loop occur s is the similar direction of the dominant and tertiary function. However I can’t help but think whether an individual chooses to develop either his auxiliary or tertiary function is also strongly dependent on the type of function itself? For eg in the outside world the sensing functions and extroverted judging functions are more widely accepted (because of higher population perhaps). So for eg an ISTJ might prefer developing his Te more than Fi because that is more of what is demanded of him and an ESFP might feel reluctant to develop his aux Fi in favor of developing his tert Te for same reason. Would love your thoughts on this.
Hmmm… Do I think that the type of function influences development? Hm. I’ll say this, which hopefully answers your question. I see our social environment as a major influence on what functions we choose to develop…. or are encouraged to develop. There multiple factors playing into this though, like family, friends, culture, society…
From a society or culture standpoint, for instance, I have noticed that a lot of high Fi males tend to focus on their Te due to perceived social standards for men. Although, I believe location is a factor here, since social standards vary from culture to culture. Fi or Fe males in a feeling culture would likely struggle less with accepting themselves as feelers.
On a more intimate level, like family and friends… Who we spend the majority of our time with definitely affects our development. People like to generally state that sensors are more prevalent then intuitives. That may be true on a global scale (depending on if the statistics are accurate), but it’s not always true on an individual level. It all depends on the circles someone runs in. Like attracts like, and there can be pockets of similar types. Ironically, I grew up in an Ne heavy household, so I never saw sensing as the norm. If I had been a lower Ne user, I probably would have had a very well-developed Ne in spite of having it low in my stack.
I know an ENTP who uses a lot of Fe, due to being in a family made up primarily of feelers. I’ve conversed with a different ENTP who is really Si heavy, due to family influence as well. Of course, I view all of this as a good thing, assuming it doesn’t happen at the expense of another function. Honestly, now that I’m thinking about it, the next time I see someone ask how to develop a certain function, I’d probably just suggest to them to start hanging around someone with high use of that function.