Blake on the auxiliary

So here it is. :point_down:

And to complete the circle: 2018.IX.10 & onwards:

@batshitty Dense enough? Feel auxiliarated? :nerd_face:
@Blake Happy?

I just thoroughly exhausted myself over in the Peterson thread and can’t even begin to read this let alone process it but thank you! I’ll digest it in bits during my posting break.

Eech, good job ignas :muscle:

Laugh my fucking ass off! @Ignas, it was all worth it just for that!

Well, I think if one thing must be said, my consistency is top-rate. I just read through all that and I must say…I’m a consistent motherfucker.

The only thing that has changed in all that is that I no longer assign the Sun to the auxiliary, but there is still some solarity in the aux., however in a few places I would say I make some mistakes on the aux. function due to that assignment.

Here is one of them:

Yeah, I just can’t agree with the first statement. The auxiliary function is not “the purpose” in life. That’s going too far. The purpose in life is definitely the dominant function, which I now (wisely) assign to the Sun.

Here’s another dubious statement I made on aux.:

That’s pushing it. Again, getting more into dominant function/sun territory with the phrase “psychic integration”.

However, “integration in action” might be a better phrase for what aux. function does.

And this is completely wrong due to the error I made of ascribing Sun to aux.:

Emphatically, I do not see the Sun as representing the “personality proper”, but rather the “temperament generalis”, the latter of which is what the dominant function represents.

Actually, just take the statement about the Sun out and the rest is correct. The aux. does represent personality proper and so does the astrological ascendant (not the sun).

Again, basically any statement where I associate the Sun to the aux.:

The auxiliary is still a big deal, but not because it’s comparable to the Sun, except to the degree that the astrological ascendant is because it symbolizes where the Sun rose on the horizon that day.

So, other than that (and any other similar statements) I still stand by all the rest I said about auxiliary function.

  • gift waiting to be unwrapped
  • luxury function
  • often bypassed in favor of tertiary
  • “show” function
  • putting on your best face to meet/impress other people
  • “front-line function”
  • “leading function” (as in leading into action not as in running the whole ship)
  • personality vs. the “temperament” of the dominant. Or personality vs. the “identity” of the dominant.
  • auxiliary is light and playful compared to the “seriousness” of the dominant (Holding together an ego-orientation is a serious business).
  • Easy, magical, and abundant…

So, as @batshitty had surmised, there is a Venusian character to the aux. in addition to the astrological ascendant implications, both of which can be pretty well seen from the above list of qualities and such for the auxiliary function.

Another word for the Venusian gift qualities of the auxiliary function is the astrological aspect of THE TRINE.

How to picture this easily to clear this whole scheme up pictorially:

  • Ascendant (auxiliary)
  • 5th house (auxiliary) (House of Venus) (I would also say this is the House of Mars, though astrological tradition just considers this the house of Venus)
  • 9th house (dominant) (House of Sun) (Trines both ascendant and 5th house)

So, from 9th house implied Sun (the dominant function of a given type), there is a trine to the two versions of the auxiliary function (1st house, 5th house).

The way I’d see this working for INFJ, for example would be:

9th house Sun = Ni

Ascendant auxiliary = Fe Pisces
5th house auxiliary = Fe Cancer (implied Venus, and maybe Mars, position depending on gender of type, INFJ in this case)

*there are two versions of each cognitive functions in the way I do things.

It’s something like that. DO NOT TAKE TOO LITERALLY. An astrology chart is measuring 3 dimensional space in 2 dimensions and what I’m suggesting here is using an astrological chart to measure something that is at least partly beyond 3 dimensions, but per the hermetic axiom “as above so below, as within so without” and the principle of the macrocosm being in the microcosm, I think there is something to it - analogically and associatively.

If, in that spirit, if some person wants to make a lovely chart to show what I’m talking about, that’d be cool.

Again, @Ignas would be the best candidate for that as I’ve seen his lovely charts. He’s a good chart-maker.

I second Ignas, and I myself will not be discussing any of this for at least two days. It’s the weekend. Bye!

what do you mean by “purpose”? can you be more specific on that?
because from your transcendent function article, it made sense to me that my “purpose” is not to just stay on my dominant function but trying to transcendent over it by the axis of inferior.
which actually seems more purposeful to me and others around me

Yo, why’d you delete your monologue. :face_with_monocle:

hmm. maybe because it was a monologue. why did you delete yours?
Lol, we all have these reasons for deleting.

I think my reason was that I feel like just because I figure something out or think I do as one particular infp, that won’t be interesting to people that aren’t infps or even infps that aren’t in the same phase of life, or that don’t like being infp, etc. Also for something to be of use to anyone it should probably be well written and I’m sure it wasn’t. But I also don’t think it’s of use to most people here. I just don’t like the feeling of not knowing how to behave in crowds…the maze is a crowd.

I wrote it mainly without a goal.
So once typed it had already served its unconscious purpose whatever that purpose was.

It was of use to me. I also am grappling with inferior/auxiliary issues, and found resonance with what you wrote. For me it is moon issues too, and how to honor both moon and sun.

Anyway, whether or not to delete is your decision. I understand it can be difficult to just let it sit out, seen. Just wanted to add some perspective.

I also wish to have you know that it was of use to me. I personally was not really seeing auxiliary magic in my life but your monologue showed me that it’s not all peaches and candy. In fact, I do believe I was taking the hyperbole too literally, and I became aware of this.

cool. thanks guys for telling me. that’s nice to know.