Mental block with cognitive functions.

[Yellow]

Alrighty folks, I want to understand some things about these cognitive functions and I'm getting a little lost. I've read a bit of Drenth, Beebe, Thompson, and Berens, and still I'm lost on a few concepts. Differences taken into account, I think it's fair to say that they are a little lost sometimes too. Anyway, since practice makes perfect, I figure that some of you are as good as experts.

Flattery aside, here's my most current confusion:

Out of curiosity while I was reading, I took a cognitive function quiz. Then, with odd results, I took every non-repeat one I could find (7 in total), and my results (with almost no variation) were Ti, Ne, Ni, Te, Si, Fi Fe, Se. I asked my INTJ to be patient with me and take a few tests. He came up with a rough Ni, Te, Fi, Se, Si, Ti, Ne, Fe. Something far more expected.

As I understood it, functions don't jumble. There are 16 personality types and those types have specifically ordered cognitive functions. They use the 8 functions in set ways. The only variation is development/maturity of each function over time. This means that a mature, well-adjusted INTP would be Ti, Ne, Si, Fe, Te, Ni, Se, Fi.

But theoretically, wouldn't even an immature INTP present with Ti, Ne, Si, Fe? I keep reading about the Ti-Fe thing as if they are inseparable (as are a number of other pairs). So are these tests to blame? Can things get jumbly with people developing in funky ways? Are only the first two really the most important/indicative of type with the other functions more or less acting as back-up singers? Is everything set in stone in a very specific order?

 

[Jennywocky]

On cell and in bed, but....yes, they can jumble. And it's called "best fit" type. These are just theories, the theoretical expectation, not necessarily that of a particular individual. First 2-3 functions mean the most for best fit.

My functions are Ti and Ne, then Ni, Fe, Si, Fi, Te, and Se.

Maybe more tomorrow if no one else explains in detail...

 

[redbaron]

As far as I can tell, people are highly capable of using the reverse side of their dom and aux functions, but find it draining.

So an INTP can use Te and Ni with close to equal potency as an ENTJ - but it's really not preferable. This is part of what I think makes the ENTJ-INTP and the INTJ-ENTP work relationship work so well. There's a similarity in capability to understand the overall idea, but with differences in preference (of method, perspective or whatever).

So an INTP who has experience in a 'Te' role will probably develop some measure of affinity with the concept of and usefulness of Te. Same for the reverse of the Ne aux.

Jungle made a post about it somewhere dividing it as, for an INTP:

Capable preference: Ti, Ne
Capable non-preference: Te, Ni
Incapable preference: Si, Fe
Incapable non-preference: Se, Fi

Incapable not to mean literally incapable. Also which test did you do? If it's the Drenth one I had a similar outcome: Ti, Ne, Ni, Te, Si, Fe, Fi, Se or something like that.

 

[Brontosaurie]

i think more possible orderings of function stack must be explored

this one is interesting: Ti-Ne-Si-F-Se-Ni-Te

 

[Architect]

yes, they can jumble. And it's called "best fit" type.

I agree and disagree, depending on what you both mean by "they can jumble".

Functions are distinct. Holding for the moment what they actually are, for simplicity assume they are some kind of "modes of cognition". So if you are "being/doing Ti", then that means you are logically thinking deeply to yourself in some way.

But, a-priori that means that you are not in a Te kind of psychic mode. You can't be, you cannot be both male and female, black and white, pregnant and not pregnant. You could argue that it's a spectrum - maybe you're thinking idly or intensely, or that you flip-flop - first Ti,Te,Ti,Te, but by definition you cannot be both. If you believe you can then come up with a different system as this one won't work (and good luck with that).

This example was for opposites, now for functions that are orthogonal (distinct) such as Ti-Ne, you do express a mixture of the two. For this example it would be thinking-speculating-thinking-speculating etc. Still there, looking at my own process when I work, it seems more an interleave of two well practiced and distinct processes. Actually I go Ti-Ne-Si - I'm doing it here, as I 'use' Si to help with factual data to support Ne's ideation and Ti's logical process. I see it as a kind of practiced endless dance between these 'modes of cognition'.

This is Type, and functions, but that's not the whole cake when it comes to Mind. There's another part I call personality. It's the cognitive learning neural net in your neo-cortex. It's the set of habits you've built up over your life that make you, you. This is definitely jumbly. It's a mess generally, as there seem to be few laws governing how it's designed. For proof look a current Psychology which is concerned only the personality and specific medical conditions.

This is what is confusing you Yellow, your monkey personality was raised in the chaotic environment here on earth, and we mostly 'see' our Personality, not our Type which is like the background sunlight illuminating our Psyche.

 

[nanook]

you are supposed to know your functions through your functions, not through analysis, only then will you know what you are talking about. test the relationship of functions in your own psyche. of course you need to start with analytical abstractions, so you can navigate your focus onto a function, but from there you just have to use the function consciously and observe what happens in your world. can you hold and enact a Ti agenda and a Fi agenda at the same time? not possible, it's like walking left and right at the same time. can your Ti agenda be molded into a relationship with a vague shadowy notion of objectified feelings, aka Fe? yes, this is to be expected or in a way not avoidable. if you introvert your thinking, feeling must remain in a zombie default state that can be best described as extroverted. it's like turning right but walking in a half circle instead of straight.

there is no such thing as an order (series) of functions. it's complete mental crap. it only exists on paper. what exists in reality is a complex relationship of functions. how to put an X-dimensional relationship on a two dimensional piece of paper? it's like saying that in the collective consciousness of humanity america comes before russia. people say shit like that, but it's not an engineers perspective. as an engineer you can't even think of "having" functions, as if they are objects. functions occur in time, as events. the whole situation is very dynamic.

these test results are rather meaningless, they test how you think about yourself or about what you do. your intj friend has probably learned how to think about himself in a way that matches his type very well, which is probably a good thing for him. if he is actually intj.

 

[Jennywocky]

I agree and disagree, depending on what you both mean by "they can jumble".

it means I was on a cellphone typing with one thumb at 1am, and I meant, "They can be out of the preordained order on a particular taking of the test."

Tests aren't infallible anyway, since they can have a hard time separating core identity from patterns developed due to environmental factors for lesser functions.

 

[Yellow]

Okay, so what I'm getting overall from your responses, are these points:

1. The test only tells you how you think you are thinking and not how you are actually thinking, therefore the tests cannot be relied upon in too much detail.

2. The jumbly thing has limitations, but jumbling needs to be explored more before we can iron out the jumbly details.

3. Some pairs of functions can be active simultaneously and some cannot.
(here's where I launch again)
More specifically, I'm getting the impression that two introverted/extroverted functions, or two type functions (like thinking) cannot be used simultaneously. Which would leave the following possible combinations (ignoring reverse-order): Ti-Ne, Ti-Se, Ti-Fe, Te-Ni, Te-Si, Te-Fi, Ne-Si, Ne-Fi, Ni-Se, Ni-Fe, Se-Fi, and Fe-Si. But looking at dominant-auxiliary pairs, Ti-Fe, Te-Fi, Ni-Se, and Ne-Si are also excluded. I'm assuming because the whole T v. F and N v. S thing.

Anyway, while most function combinations are apparently simultaneously impossible, I'm reminded that our brains can be rather speedy. I cannot walk both left and right at the same time, but I am still free to switch directions at will. So, is it possible for a person rapidly change from one mode of thinking to another seemingly contradictory one to suit the needs of the moment? Without further information on the subject, I think it would certainly explain jumbling. It might also help explain people who have a hard time typing themselves.

 

[EyeSeeCold]

The problem is that the brain doesn't work in percentages. What is being measured here? How many times you agree with statements that you think represent your lifestyle/thought patterns? What does that have to do with the magnitude of a function's impact on your psyche?

Plus the fact that tests aren't perfectly accurate and that functions are high level abstractions of the complex mind.

The best way to address these issues imo is to work from a symptom or quality-based model where the presence of certain traits necessitate/precludes other types, as opposed to a quantity based measurement because, to reiterate my point, a scale poorly captures the brain's psychic activity.

 

[Seteleechete]

Anyway, while most function combinations are apparently simultaneously impossible, I'm reminded that our brains can be rather speedy. I cannot walk both left and right at the same time, but I am still free to switch directions at will. So, is it possible for a person rapidly change from one mode of thinking to another seemingly contradictory one to suit the needs of the moment? Without further information on the subject, I think it would certainly explain jumbling. It might also help explain people who have a hard time typing themselves.

I am particularly interested in this part. So you can't use some lines of thinking at the same time as others, but you can switch them at a moments notice... what becomes the practical difference rather than just going by the statement that you have both the mutually exclusive lines of thinking? I mean all this seems to tell me is that you can't think in two different ways at the same time. You can still think the two different ways subsequently. Granted it also tells me potential preferences of what lines of thinking someone will use.

 

[Perfectly Normal Beast]

This is what is confusing you Yellow, your monkey personality was raised in the chaotic environment here on earth, and we mostly 'see' our Personality, not our Type which is like the background sunlight illuminating our Psyche.

perhaps this effect could be at least diminished by postulating a personal utopia and imagining how you would answer the test questions in that reality, in order to filter out some of the unnatural (to the core identity) behaviours caused by environmental factors.

i have tried this myself a few times, the results varying depending on how i define the utopia. for example, i find myself answering in a much less anti-social/reclusive way when i pretend i live in a world where i don't hate nearly everybody.

i know virtually nothing about mbti though so maybe someone who does could make more (non/)sense of this idea.

meh

 

[Brontosaurie]

I am particularly interested in this part. So you can't use some lines of thinking at the same time as others, but you can switch them at a moments notice... what becomes the practical difference rather than just going by the statement that you have both the mutually exclusive lines of thinking? I mean all this seems to tell me is that you can't think in two different ways at the same time. You can still think the two different ways subsequently. Granted it also tells me potential preferences of what lines of thinking someone will use.

but function is a preference, a perspective, a mode of preparation, an attitude. that's why the word "function" is misleading.

imagine an ESTJ who spends all his time and mental energy building a character that can be relied on to make decisions according to standards, to gain the rhetorical upper hand in arguments and to assume authority. that's what they're about. that's why and how they're Te(-Si). an INTP doesn't really "use Te" right after "using Ti" if it quickly goes from something classic Ti like conceptual analysis, etymology or logical musings, to something classic Te like making pointless remarks. it still happens within a Ti-dominant personality. it's an expression of a coherent pattern where certain functions have certain roles and priorities.

maybe i just don't see the issue you guys see, but it appears to me that your idea of function is too much an idea of specific skill/behavior/activity

anyway, Xi and Xe are at direct odds, in opposition. Ti wants to strip down, make sense, converge, question, reduce. Te wants to build up, assume, diverge, assert, expand. most people have a preference and in debates it becomes very clear. doesn't have to mean a TP/FJ never reads a factoid and applies it to reality. but they're more wary of the complex interdependence of positions, more humble to epistemology and more likely to present as operating with the sound treatment of hypotheticals rather than as the arbiter of facts. in socionics, Ti&Fe are referred to as democrats, Fi&Te as aristocrats. it captures one aspect of this difference very well.

 

[Seteleechete]

Yes, indeed you seem to be right I am equalling typing to a series of behavioral patterns. I will have to adjust my thinking a bit.

 

[Yellow]

but function is a preference, a perspective, a mode of preparation, an attitude. that's why the word "function" is misleading.

imagine an ESTJ who spends all his time and mental energy building a character that can be relied on to make decisions according to standards, to gain the rhetorical upper hand in arguments and to assume authority. that's what they're about. that's why and how they're Te(-Si). an INTP doesn't really "use Te" right after "using Ti" if it quickly goes from something classic Ti like conceptual analysis, etymology or logical musings, to something classic Te like making pointless remarks. it still happens within a Ti-dominant personality. it's an expression of a coherent pattern where certain functions have certain roles and priorities.

maybe i just don't see the issue you guys see, but it appears to me that your idea of function is too much an idea of specific skill/behavior/activity

anyway, Xi and Xe are at direct odds, in opposition. Ti wants to strip down, make sense, converge, question, reduce. Te wants to build up, assume, diverge, assert, expand. most people have a preference and in debates it becomes very clear. doesn't have to mean a TP/FJ never reads a factoid and applies it to reality. but they're more wary of the complex interdependence of positions, more humble to epistemology and more likely to present as operating with the sound treatment of hypotheticals rather than as the arbiter of facts. in socionics, Ti&Fe are referred to as democrats, Fi&Te as aristocrats. it captures one aspect of this difference very well.

I think this is the final piece to clear up my confusion. I was absolutely interpreting it as an idea of a specific skill/behavior/activity.

 

[Brontosaurie]

I think this is the final piece to clear up my confusion. I was absolutely interpreting it as an idea of a specific skill/behavior/activity.

i dno if you are sarcastic sry if i was smartass dickwad

 

[Yellow]

i dno if you are sarcastic sry if i was smartass dickwad

No, I was fully serious.

Though, you aren't the first person to think I'm being sarcastic here. Can I just take a moment to put on record that I am never sarcastic during an actual discussion? I tend to take them seriously, as this is basically my only source for them at the moment. Nor do I take cheap shots or fling enormous fallacies around. Sometimes, I can be a little dismissive and I've even bordered on condescending, but I have to be pretty annoyed to get to that point.

Of course, about 19% of the time, I try to be funny/lighthearted, but I'd like to believe that's pretty obvious.

Basically, if there are two ways to interpret how I've said something, and one of them seems bitchy, please assume I meant the other thing.

Also for the record, I don't tend to provide citations during discussions anymore, because Google, but if someone requests some of me when I make a claim, I won't be offended.

 

[redbaron]

How do we know that you're not being sarcastic right now?

 

[Yellow]

Because I know the secret password.

 

[Brontosaurie]

i hereby request citations then. it's the only natural course of this.

 

[Alias]

I get Te, Ti, Ne, Ni, so most tests that don't ask much about Introversion or Extraversion think I am ENTP. And sometimes I do act like an ENTP. I love debate, arguing, and can be downright excited when I talk to people who are intelligent enough to listen and keep up. Whatever my type. I do not fit exactly into Ti, Ne, Si, Fe. Si is definitely not my thing, and my Fe rarely shows. I'm happy that I am able to fit into these two types and that I do not dwell in the confinements of lurking in one type.

EDIT: However, when a test asks about Introversion or Extraversion, it will say INTP. I'm still content transcending two types.

 

[OrLevitate]

You don't have any outstanding complexes, or "type", if you're not lining up with the same functions which means you are more adaptable, or you are between complexes at the moment, or you don't understand yourself or the functions well enough.

Complexes aren't necessarily a bad thing, although many can become such and they all have "shadows". If someone were to become the "shadow" state of their complex, then they will either spontaneously combust, revert to personifying a milder degree of their complex, move on out of it to become fixated on something else if their psychological needs aren't met, or will have found a balance if their now adjusted personality gels with their environment. It's the conquering of a fixation, of which the fixation is the particular reason that their type isn't working well for them any more. This is part of positive disintegration: as the anxiety grows-- as one's coping mechanisms engendered by their complex-- increase, then their coping mechanisms react more strongly, possibly completely consuming the person's personality. If that doesn't get their psychological needs met (sufficient supply of fifth element) then any type will probably enter a depression, or enter the depression before embracing their shadowsauce, and anyways over time whether consciously or not, adapt their personality to their environment.

The types listed by Jung are predicated on "true" types, which are people that are prime examples of a complex. He lists the traits of the person who he considers "normal" of each complex, and sometimes some of the more extreme possibilities.

Your functions don't line up with a specific type completely, however the functions are fluid like the 'types' they're based on are. They're preferences, and they can change with the course of life, however people tend to naturally prefer one set of functions which aligns with a type as time goes on, due to repeated use of the function and neglect of others. There is also one's particular neuro-anatomy to take into account, what I mean by that is that certain functions tend to be preferred early on in childhood over other functions due to a strength or deficit in an area of the brain's functioning that correlates enough with a specific function. But again, the brain is molded by its environment when its very young, and isn't even fully grown until like 20 or whatever. The specific neuro-biology isn't terribly affective of type unless they have a huge lack or cognitive strength in some area (which will probably lead to a disorder rendering any specific complex either not very applicable or shrouded in disorder, or if a great strength like being a genius or something then high adaptability and probably a general lack of type/ complex, or a really pronounced one)but mostly the brain is formed by its early environment.

Types can change based on later life circumstances, but most people will usually tend to stick with the complex or "type" they grew up into while young. If someone had a lot of change in their childhood, and it wasn't traumatic enough to be a personality defining thing in itself-- the trauma, and their parents weren't particularly outstanding in any direction in regards to being the most consistent relationship in early childhood that affects how the child will automatically learn to feel loved in some manner, then they can remain "blank slates" to more of a degree than other people who have an early childhood/childhood experience of a more formative nature. For example, if there were a child brought up with a particular kind of childhood, they could remain balanced in their functions.

The longer a person is in one particular environment, the more strengthened a specific type becomes, a most compatible set of function preferences becomes used. The functions have an interrelated structure that tends to make one function vestigial or repressed as another becomes more consistently preferred as a means to perform as a human in their specific environment to get their psychological needs met. Everyone has a self perception that they attribute a value judgement to of good or bad, positive or negative, to a differing degree, to some it's more unconscious or unexamined. Where the origin ("origin" is used somewhat loosely as ultimately the relativity of ourselves to other people is what we will use to define ourselves and good luck trying to escape that because if you can read this you've been alive way too long to change that) of that identity lies (which Jung called the "object" in his writing about the psychological types) is like it sounds, and their leverage on that identity-- how they make it more good, how they sponge life force out of it, is another variable. For example, the INTP's origin of their self image is within themselves, as opposed to an ESFJ's origin of their identity being in other people's perception of them.

(also the 16 MBTI types correlate with astrological types, and pearson-maar, and tons of other typology mythology included [dat's part of how Jung made his system], guize)

I used the term 'complex' loosely, I think Jung had his own version of what a complex is, and then modern psych has a different definition.

So, everyone's functional stack as described by Jung are always in flux, either becoming more pronounced or turning into a different one or turning into a more balanced state. You can look at it as a filled in circle, the archetypes defining segments of the outside border, and people revolving around the inside of the circle, usually going outwards over time towards a more defined type. Usually. Path of least resistance and what not, but with an environment in enough constant flux or more adaptable mind/ less psychological limitations then etc etc etc etc

The types are loosely correlated with universal archetypes, or "primordial images" that are fundamental 'types' of their own recurring in many different culture's mythologies. They're universal because they're all based on people and common life stages. You could say that they're like thee pillars of identity, you could say they're deities, or you could say they're common "actualizations"?.

All of anyone's data ever on typing was ultimately based on a bunch of -unique individual people- though.

 

[Yellow]

i hereby request citations then. it's the only natural course of this.

Okay. Here is my library of citations. Please let me know if you are looking for anything in particular, and I'll see what I can do.

 

[Yellow]

@ OrLevitate

Your post was too long for me to feel comfortable quoting it entirely, and I didn't want to quote just part and ignore the rest because it was so comprehensive. Anyway, thank you. That made a lot of sense.

 

[scorpiomover]

But theoretically, wouldn't even an immature INTP present with Ti, Ne, Si, Fe? I keep reading about the Ti-Fe thing as if they are inseparable (as are a number of other pairs). So are these tests to blame? Can things get jumbly with people developing in funky ways? Are only the first two really the most important/indicative of type with the other functions more or less acting as back-up singers? Is everything set in stone in a very specific order?

Jung described typology as a combination of 2 separate elements, that combine in the individual's usage to produce a specific result.

1) Jung called E/I general-attitude-types, more like breadth vs depth. Sometimes, one examines a problem with more depth than breadth, which Jung called taking an introverted attitude. Sometimes, one examines an issue with more breadth than depth, in which case, which Jung called taking an extroverted attitude. A person who is an introvert, is simply someone who has "found their groove", and settled into generally relying on depth over breadth to solve their problems in general. But when the introvert has a compelling reason to use more breadth than depth, the introvert acts like an extrovert in those situations and on those topics.

2) One can take an introverted or extroverted attitude to one's Thinking, Feelings, Sense data, and Intuitions, which are the functions. As a result, Jung described Ti as thinking in the introverted attitude, i.e. taking a more "depth than breadth" attitude to one's rational thinking. Each individual has a general attitude that he usually takes. But sometimes, an introvert will take an extroverted attitude to a topic, and vice versa. There, a Ti-dom would actually be using Te. So INTPs (Ti-Ne) often have developed their Te as well as their Ti, just to a lesser extent, and often, they have developed their Ni as well as their Ne, just to a lesser extent.

Out of curiosity while I was reading, I took a cognitive function quiz. Then, with odd results, I took every non-repeat one I could find (7 in total), and my results (with almost no variation) were Ti, Ne, Ni, Te, Si, Fi Fe, Se.

This can happen, when an INTP has sufficiently developed his/her T & N, thus developing both Te as well as Ti (with Ti > Te), and developing both Ni and Ne (with Ne > Ni), but when the INTP has not developed their tertiary and auxiliary functions yet, as the development of the tertiary (Si in INTPs) normally happens in mid-20s to mid-30s, and the development of the inferior (Fe in INTPs), from the mid-30s onwards. However, this would produce Ti > Te, Ne > Ni, Si > Se, and Fe > Fi.

Your Ni > Ne, and your Fi > Fe. This shows a massive influence of Ni visionary strategising over natural Ne, and Fi ambition over Fe caring for others. Unlikely, unless the INTP decided to go all out for what the INTP wants, no matter what.

INTPs also have an unconscious social chameleon ability. When we want to get on with others, our subconscious Fe makes us morph ourselves to resemble their behaviour by using Ne-style mimicry, so as to get on better with them. We often don't realise that we're doing it.

When INTPs are spending a lot of time with a specific person, then we often morph our general behaviour, and even our thinking, to be like them as much as possible, so that they'll understand us and will get on with us as well as possible. It often affects our test results.

I think that there's a serious likelihood that you're unconsciously imitating your b/f's thinking, so as to get on better with him.

I asked my INTJ to be patient with me and take a few tests. He came up with a rough Ni, Te, Fi, Se, Si, Ti, Ne, Fe. Something far more expected.

Actually, INTJ cognitive functions test results on INTJf, usually show that INTJs have Ti close to Te, and Ne close to Ni. Your b/f has either seriously developed his Fi and Se, far more than his Ti & Ne, which means that he's far more in touch with his emotions and accepts the reality of the status quo far more than he is logical or imaginative, which means that he's a caring, sharing INTJ that comes across as not that smart, or, he's simply not bothered to develop his functions yet in any form other than the one that comes naturally to him. INTJs often don't care too much about others, and therefore, sometimes don't develop their abilities fully, because they don't see why they should have to develop at all. Since his Fi > Fe, then he'll still care deeply for those who are special to him, such as yourself. But since his Fe is the least developed of all his functions, don't expect him to not insult your brother to the point where any man would deck him and break his jaw.

So you're morphing to think more like him, to get on better with him. But he's being his usual self. Usual INTP-INTJ story.

 

[Yellow]

... or, he's simply not bothered to develop his functions yet in any form other than the one that comes naturally to him. INTJs often don't care too much about others, and therefore, sometimes don't develop their abilities fully, because they don't see why they should have to develop at all. Since his Fi > Fe, then he'll still care deeply for those who are special to him, such as yourself. But since his Fe is the least developed of all his functions, don't expect him to not insult your brother to the point where any man would deck him and break his jaw.

So you're morphing to think more like him, to get on better with him. But he's being his usual self. Usual INTP-INTJ story.

I will take this as a confession that you've been spying on us.