Jung Super Simplified

[Black Rose]

Se: I see Jane

Ni: Jane will do x

Ne: What if Jane were an elephant

Si: Jane is an elephant

Fe: Jane likes x

Ti: x is y

Te: to get x do y

Fi: I like x

 

[scorpiomover]

Si: Jane is an elephant

Ti: x is y

If x = "Jane", and y = "an elephant", then Si is the same as Ti.

 

[Black Rose]

Si: Jane is an elephant

Ti: x is y

If x = "Jane", and y = "an elephant", then Si is the same as Ti.

Ti is a judgment function but Si is a perception function

In Ti: Jane is an elephant; Jane is not human and is an actual elephant

In Si: Jane is an elephant; the human Jane is seen as a scary elephant

Si: means anything can be anything in the primitive sense like how Jung said Si types see trains as scary monsters.

(if x = "Jane", and y = "an elephant") is Ne because it is only hypothetical whereas in Si is an actuality, Jane the human is actually an elephant or the train is actually an elephant.

Si pars with Ne and Ti pars with Fe

 

[scorpiomover]

Ti is a judgment function but Si is a perception function

In Ti: Jane is an elephant; Jane is not human and is an actual elephant

That would be a perception that Jane is not a human.

In Si: Jane is an elephant; the human Jane is seen as a scary elephant

That would be a judgement that Jane is scary.

Si: means anything can be anything in the primitive sense like how Jung said Si types see trains as scary monsters.

He's being polemic. Si sees a train. Trains can be dangerous, if you're crossing the tracks. Si thus says "since trains CAN be dangerous if you're crossing the tracks, if you ensure that you only cross the tracks at the official crossing-zones when there's a green light, someone made the effort to warn people when the trains are coming, and when it's safe to cross, by setting up the green light. So as long as you go to the crossing and wait till the light turns green, you'll be perfectly safe to cross the train-tracks any time you want, with zero problems."

But to those who don't even understand clever logic, Si-doms sound like they're afraid of trains.

 

[Black Rose]

Ti is a judgment function but Si is a perception function

In Ti: Jane is an elephant; Jane is not human and is an actual elephant

That would be a perception that Jane is not a human.

In Si: Jane is an elephant; the human Jane is seen as a scary elephant

That would be a judgement that Jane is scary.

You have these mixed up.

You have to understand these are abstract condensed examples of Jung not to be taken literally.

A person with Ti would judge that the entity Jane is an elephant or something else and that is Ti but a person with Si would perceive that the entity Jane is an elephant only if that is their perception and nothing else. So perception is not judgment. x is y is a judgment but the perception: "Jane is an elephant" does not need to be about the entity Jane being an actual elephant. x is y is supported to be introverted in judgment as thinking because you are making an internal relation between two things in the abstract: x can be anything so long as y is the derivation of x. But in perception, it is irrational, if you perceive Jane as an elephant you cannot, not perceive Jane that way.

Si: means anything can be anything in the primitive sense like how Jung said Si types see trains as scary monsters.

He's being polemic. Si sees a train. Trains can be dangerous, if you're crossing the tracks. Si thus says "since trains CAN be dangerous if you're crossing the tracks, if you ensure that you only cross the tracks at the official crossing-zones when there's a green light, someone made the effort to warn people when the trains are coming, and when it's safe to cross, by setting up the green light. So as long as you go to the crossing and wait till the light turns green, you'll be perfectly safe to cross the train-tracks any time you want, with zero problems."

But to those who don't even understand clever logic, Si-doms sound like they're afraid of trains.

I was being polemic also, Si types can perceive anything as anything in the primitive sense but I did not mean specifically Si types always see trains as monsters. But that does not mean perception = judgment, The op is supposed to be an abstraction of Jung if you understand him. Ti is not Si because that is not the abstraction I made. You would not say they were if you understood the difference between Si and Ti.

 

[Black Rose]

@scorpiomover

I made it more literal (less abstract) so you can understand.

-

Se: I literally see the actual person Jane in front of me.

Ni: Jane the person will literally do action x in the future.

Ne: Hypothetically what if Jane the person were an elephant in the hypothetical place Carrot Land?

Si: In the primitive sense I perceive the literal person Jane as an actual elephant in a literal city.

Fe: Jane the person likes carrots to eat and I know this.

Ti: x the concept is the derivative of the concept y

Te: to get the car to run then you must turn the key.

Fi: I Jane know that I personally like carrots.

 

[ZenRaiden]

That is super simplified.

I think this would have been useful when I was learning about cog functions.

But we have to remember that Ti is not logic.
Ti is introvert thinking.
Which is reason, logic, thinking of all shapes and forms, but in many ways unconscious.
Although the primary functions are supposedly the dominant ergo most conscious.

So Ti is like the engine of INTP.
Its humming and you can barely hear it, until its going real fast, but all you see is its results and the speed, and rev.
So for me Ti is mostly just pressing pedal.
Does not result in logical. It results to reason of sorts.
Logic would be subset.
So when you say x is y it sounds like what ISTJs would be.
I would say then that simper version would be Ti= Why?

 

[Black Rose]

But we have to remember that Ti is not logic.
Ti is introvert thinking.
Which is reason, logic, thinking of all shapes and forms, but in many ways unconscious.
Although the primary functions are supposedly the dominant ergo most conscious.

I would say then that simper version would be Ti= Why?

I am not sure.

It seems that Ti would be in the head or more and be like: The orientation introversion is taking hold of the concept from the inside.

I don't want to mix Ti with either Ne or Se in the essence of what it is because those result in two different things. Ti Se would not be "Why?" but instead be the x is y with senses not concepts. So Ti Se would be more: these objects x exist for reason y.

That may be unconscious but iNtuition is the unconscious as oriented.

NeTe is: I have this idea and what it is in capability. Ne is with Ti or Te.

iNtuition as introverted would be: I am the intuition. The object of Ne is divorced from self so is not the self but in Ni it is the self and in all things because all perceived is self.

The contrast is that Si is more like the relation as said primitive. Si is in self but then make one become what may be the lizard brain, intestines, and spine. Ti and Si x is y is not exactly concept but instead this inside sense is because x is y. Te and Si would be: doing x gets gut reaction y.

Se: these outer things exist

Ni: I am all things perceived conscious/unconscious

Ne: outside "things" lend to cascades of ideas

Si: spine, lizard brain, guts - I get these sensations from the inside

Fe: I am aware of many relational attachments of persons to each other

Ti: concept x is y is because of reason (?)

Te: doing x results in outcome y

Fi: this attachment is mine or yours, personal one on one

 

[ZenRaiden]

It seems that Ti

I think its best to look at Ti doms though of understanding the full function.
Ti Ne Si Fe is INTP.
Ti dom means INTPs think first before acting. Logic is not action. Ti is however lead function for INTP. So if Ti dom is INTP function how do they ever act?

 

[Black Rose]

It seems that Ti

I think its best to look at Ti doms though of understanding the full function.
Ti Ne Si Fe is INTP.
Ti dom means INTPs think first before acting. Logic is not action. Ti is however lead function for INTP. So if Ti dom is INTP function how do they ever act?

I think physical action is separate from Jungian cognition. Or, How do you separate Ti from Te ? Any type can utilize all of their functions but the distinction of the dom I or E is important. E is the case where we have the interactions with the outside world. ISTP would use cognition in action because the object may be part of the reasons to act or not act. ISTP thinks about the object in all its relations to everything on the spot. INTP may be more abstract because Ne needs the objects to get ideas but actions would be deliberated by Ti if they become necessary for exploration otherwise Ti just wants to think and think and think. Ne is beholden to Ti to get Ti to think and action resides in making use of Ne or Fe. Si gives information but I think is closest to physical action. Si is the basic drives so actions are instinctive that way. ISTJ as an example would use Te to discover and build actions to fit Si as in protocalls. Si and Fe would "just know" what to do on what would cause them to have bad situations in communal settings.

Since Si is irrational some people mistake this for Ni. I know an ISTJ who thinks they are INTJ but they are confusing Ni with Si-Fi, these two functions together are good vibes/bad vibes sort of thing but not like Fe-Si, it is internal all the way to the bone. Ni-Fi is sort of like a link between yourself and what you expect. Law of attraction. Everything that happens you like or dislike and you are causing it. Fi-Si has this all inside the core but Ni-Fi has it in everything and all things. both sink inward very fast. ISTJ think that whatever causes good or bad vibes should be learned and thus at the core of each person is this need to cause internal Fi-Si and it must be dealt with at all times, we resist the Id only because of higher cognition.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Ti is introvert thinking subjective

 

[Black Rose]

Ti is introvert thinking subjective

I think it likes to be consistent with itself.

To keep all thoughts in order.

 

[ZenRaiden]

lol that meme, so true.