On the cognitive functions...

[Fuyuki Osari]

I've learned that many people interested in typology can take offense pretty quickly when you question what they see as the basics, so I will begin by assuring you that I do not mean to offend. This is simply the result of my ego-driven (Fi?) brainstorming (Ne?) and analysis (Ti?), and I thought I'd bounce my thoughts off the INTP Forum community now that I'm pretty confident in my conclusions. You guys are the most like me, after all!

There are two dimensions to explore. I will first explain my understanding of cognitive functions. After that, I will present my ideas for an MBTI-style typology framework utilizing my cognitive function hypothesis.

The Functions
To begin, I've consolidated the cognitive functions, reducing the total number from eight to four. I'll list them now, using... reappropriated shorthand, after which I'll explain each.

1) Fi + Ti = Ji
2) Fe + Te = Je
3) Ni + Si = Pi
4) Ne + Se = Pe

1) As many on these forums have already related, INTPs are not limited to Ti--they often use Fi quite extensively, as well. This has even led to a somewhat common label of "INXP" for those who find their usage of each roughly equal. (I personally identify with the INXP label, myself, insofar as I will allow myself to be labeled.) I've also personally known an ENFP who crossed over to ENTP after meeting me, but changed back after undergoing hormone replacement therapy (MtF trans).

2) There is also evidence of the existence of INXJs, from a cursory glance at Google results. I won't bother sorting through them. That people identify with the label is evidence enough of the phenomenon, I think.

3) Ni is the ability to subconsciously determine a pattern by comparing memories--it's functionally identical to Si, differentiated only by superior functioning.

4) Ne is the ability to imagine alternative realities and analyze them. Where Se is simply reality, Ne is augmented/virtual reality created by superior imagination.

(As you may have determined, I am... a bit of an N supremacist. I don't mean to offend, but... intelligence is the only strong correlation I've observed.)

That should about cover it for the cognitive functions. Now, on to typology!

The Typology
If you read my modifications to the cognitive functions, the first step should be obvious. The T/F dichotomy has got to go. It's a false dichotomy from the beginning, but it is also demonstrably highly variable--whether one scores as T or F is determined by their environment, mindset, hormone balance... and not their personality. It tells us nothing useful about the individual.

This leaves us with eight basic personalities and four functions. Predictably, E/I and P/J are representative of the individual's preferred function. I've found this is the main factor in determining personality. I'll list the correlations now.

EJ = Je
EP = Pe
IJ = Pi
IP = Ji

On the other hand, N/S is essentially a measure of intelligence. It's only natural that a more intelligent person would interact with the world in a different way--for example, where the ESJ sees a system in place and works within it, the more intelligent ENJ sees a malleable system and uses it. They are basically the same, but the ENJ is simply far more adept at what they do, and the same applies to all S/N differences.

That said, the S way of thinking does have its own advantages. While it is more rigid and confined, it is also much more focused and sensitive to detail. A world without the S would be much worse off, without question.

Conclusion
Yup, that about covers it. What do you think?

 

[snafupants]

Although introverted intuition is my main function, I use introverted thinking and introverted feeling equally well; meanwhile I flounder with extraverted thinking and extraverted feeling to a pretty demonstrable and commensurate degree. Since I can relate to introverted thinking a little more than the tertiary introverted feeling of an INTJ, I call myself an INFJ, but I wouldn't stake my life on that proposition. I have tacitly considered the basically misanthropic Schopenhauer-like INFJ synopsis as apt enough for moving forward. Even with historical figures, especially exaggerated personalities in philosophers (e.g., Nietzsche, Wittgenstein, Schopenhauer) there's an ambivalence between these two types; perhaps some ambiguity needs to be tolerated within a fuzzy conceptual framework. To touch on your third point, though, wouldn't one difference between introverted sensing and introverted intuition be past and future focus, respectively? The implication there is that introverted sensing relies more on tangible memories and proven routines whereas introverted intuition relies on embryonic schemes and novel theories; please forgive me for romanticizing the latter.

 

[Fuyuki Osari]

Actually... Hm. Perceiving functions might not even be that relevant to personality... In much the same way as S/N, E/I may be only an outside behavioral modifier, with the preferred judging function being the main functional division between personalities... I'm not sure. I'd really need more data to draw a conclusion here.

Edit: Oh, haha, I missed your post, snafupants. Sorry about that.

I disagree with the "future-focused" assessment of introverted intuition. While the output may often relate to the future, I've found this is rooted in an understanding the past. The "embryonic schemes and novel theories" you've mentioned don't just materialize from the ether, I'd think.

 

[ElvenVeil]

alright. First of, you are way off with your idea that N/S is a measurement of intelligence. It's lack of observation of S people that leads you to such a wrong conclusion. You should just leave that idea, and go back to observing more.

the idea of Je/Ji etc is fine. The Je functions have things in common and so it seems reasonable to put them together. I really dislike the idea INXP for instance.. Although INFPs and INTPs (picking a random combination) have similarities and obviously both feel and think, I believe their way of dealing with things in the head is different to some extent. Ji functions also overlaps. But as Ti and Fi are not the same, it simply makes good sense to divide them into two, just as it makes sense to keep intution and sensing I believe. So the four letter combination simply just gives you a better picture of the person than IP etc.

 

[snafupants]

Actually... Hm. Perceiving functions might not even be that relevant to personality... In much the same way as S/N, E/I may be only an outside behavioral modifier, with the preferred judging function being the main functional division between personalities... I'm not sure. I'd really need more data to draw a conclusion here.

Edit: Oh, haha, I missed your post, snafupants. Sorry about that.

I disagree with the "future-focused" assessment of introverted intuition. While the output may often relate to the future, I've found this is rooted in an understanding the past. The "embryonic schemes and novel theories" you've mentioned don't just materialize from the ether, I'd think.

Most things, of course, ought to be rooted somewhat in the past and previous innovation; quantum leaps in understanding are usually appreciated only posthumously if at all. Tradition matters only to the degree to which it furnishes new ideas. I, obviously, still find my past/future dichotomy serviceable, if incomplete. Hey, I never promised a unified field theory of personality. As humans, though, we tend to worry about the future, and introverted intuitive folk seem to be excellent worriers. I would argue, artificially taken in isolation, introverted sensing is more entrenched in experience whereas introverted intuition is predicated on possibilities; introverted sensing seems like a dead end and insufficient in itself; introverted intuition, however, is pretty much autonomous and just needs a modicum of help from extraverted sensing and raw data to theorize with and on.

 

[Fuyuki Osari]

ElvenVeil, there is no meat to your argument. It is an assertion based on neither evidence nor logic.

On the matter of N/S, "You're wrong because you haven't watched people enough" is not a valid criticism. Furthermore, I'm not one to enjoy being attacked for holding a position others find morally unpalatable, and your reaction smacks of such judgment. That aside, such an objection, even if valid, would not disprove a core similarity between Ne and Se or Ni and Si, yet you did not proceed to offer a logical reason for disagreement on that point.

As for your disagreement on Ti/Fi, you simply assert that Ti and Fi are different, but do not provide any evidence or reasoning at all for this difference. My evidence is in the vast number of supposed "Ti-doms" or "Fi-doms" who seem to be far more capable of Fi or Ti, respectively, than either Te or Fe. You cannot discredit this evidence by asserting it is wrong.

However, I will explain the similarity between Ti and Fi for you. Ti judges logically based on internal models of reality. Fi judges emotionally based on internal models of morality. Both refer to an internal model to find the answer to a question. Interestingly, either model can be crafted by either method--a "Ti" model can be built on emotion (for instance, in creating a model of reality where fairies exist because you really like fairies), while a "Fi" model can be built on reason (for instance, in creating a moral framework where wasting food is immoral because wastefulness logically leads to others starving--though this is actually an intricate interweaving of the two, as the assumption that others starving is bad is emotional!).

To be honest, I'm really not entirely sure how anyone ever thought a human being with very weak Fi could possibly exist. The decision to stay alive, for example, is Fi-based, and I can assure you it's a top priority for everyone.

 

[Fuyuki Osari]

Most things, of course, ought to be rooted somewhat in the past and previous innovation; quantum leaps in understanding are usually appreciated only posthumously if at all. Tradition matters only to the degree to which it furnishes new ideas. I, obviously, still find my past/future dichotomy serviceable, if incomplete. Hey, I never promised a unified field theory of personality. As humans, though, we tend to worry about the future, and introverted intuitive folk seem to be excellent worriers. I would argue, artificially taken in isolation, introverted sensing is more entrenched in experience whereas introverted intuition is predicated on possibilities; introverted sensing seems like a dead end and insufficient in itself; introverted intuition, however, is pretty much autonomous and just needs a modicum of help from extraverted sensing and raw data to theorize with and on.

Well, I'm not entirely sure the ability to worry is even rooted in Ni. It seems more the result of an efficient combination of Ni and a judging function. For instance, I've read a lot about the "Ni-Fi loop," and I've experienced it quite a number of times myself. (Which is odd for someone who isn't supposed to have Ni in their stack... Though it gets even messier when Ne comes in and starts spewing complex explanations for whatever Ni has found...)

Si really is a bit of a dead end, though, but I find its drawback is that it must be actively engaged and encouraged, limiting its ability to integrate with a judging function. As such, all it can effectively do is determine simple, surface-level correlations and send them off to be double-checked.

 

[AureliaSeverina]

However, I will explain the similarity between Ti and Fi for you. Ti judges logically based on internal models of reality. Fi judges emotionally based on internal models of morality. Both refer to an internal model to find the answer to a question. Interestingly, either model can be crafted by either method--a "Ti" model can be built on emotion (for instance, in creating a model of reality where fairies exist because you really like fairies), while a "Fi" model can be built on reason (for instance, in creating a moral framework where wasting food is immoral because wastefulness logically leads to others starving--though this is actually an intricate interweaving of the two, as the assumption that others starving is bad is emotional!).
.

Interesting. I never thought about it this way before.

However, where is your evidence that Ti-doms do Fi just as well or often as Ti and Te's do Fe just as well or often?
I'm an INTJ and my Fe is rubbish. Let's say if someone comes to my house, I'll offer them a drink like a good host. But I have to consciously think "That's what people do when they have guests." I learned lots of polite phrases and gestures, but I basically only say them because I know that I ought to. I don't even notice what's bothering people unless they tell me so directly. INTPs immediately notice the needs of their friends, even if they have very week Fe.

 

[Auburn]

This is interesting.

I think you have the right intuition about what you are seeing, but there may be snippets of data missing from your assessment that makes the deduction process partial, imo; information which I will attempt to relay.

The Four Classes you've listed (Ji, Je, Pi, Pe) are real and I agree with your general direction of thinking, except I see a better solution to it than to discard the other dichotomies. Nay, perhaps I should say that I know the reality of it.

If you actually take several, say Ji type, you'll notice two different types exist within that one as well. It is just a finer distinction, one that is a bit more difficult to see. The broader grouping of Ji is more obvious; there are people primarily led by an internal Code of reasoning.

Now, we can choose to halt the classification system at any plateu. We could say there are four types and it is not possible to divide them further because no division holds consistent within that group.

But I would argue that within Ji types there are indeed two different modes of processing. This is Fi+Te and Ti+Fe. One has an internal code of ethic and a practical outer logic. The other has an internal code of logic and an practical outer ethic. Yours is probably Ti+Fe, I think. Now notice that "T" and "F" are present in both, the difference is the orientation.

Sure, we don't have to make the T/F divide. I actually agree with you on that. I wouldn't consider either of those two sub-Ji-types to be one or the other; they both use both, but they do so differently.

Let me demonstrate this duality using a snippet from your own opening post as an example:

Spoiler

Ti: Green
Ne: Orange
Si: Blue
Fe: Pink


I've learned that many people interested in typology can take offense pretty quickly when you question what they see as the basics, so I will begin by assuring you that I do not mean to offend. { Fe consciousness and apologeticism}This is simply the result of my ego-driven (Fi?) brainstorming (Ne?) and analysis (Ti?), and I thought I'd bounce my thoughts off the INTP Forum community { Pe+Ji toggling}now that I'm pretty confident in my conclusions.{non-dominant Pi}You guys are the most like me, after all!{group hug!}

There are two dimensions to explore{deduction} I will first explain my understanding of cognitive functions. After that, I will present my ideas for an MBTI-style typology framework utilizing my cognitive function hypothesis.{taking the time to lay out exactly how one's logic was formed, in a way that is considerate and digestible for others is very Ti/Fe}

The Functions
To begin, I've consolidated the cognitive functions, reducing the total number from eight to four.I'll list them now, using...reappropriated shorthand, after which I'll explain each.{again, Fe consideration of Ti's logic}

(...)


The Typology
If you read my modifications to the cognitive functions, the first step should be obvious.{Pi}The T/F dichotomy has got to go. It's a false dichotomy from the beginning {Ti+Si}, but it is also demonstrably highly variable--whether one scores as T or F is determined by{Ne proffer to mystery} their environment, mindset, hormone balance... and not their personality. It tells us nothing useful about the individual.

This leaves us with eight basic personalities and four functions. Predictably, E/I and P/J are representative of the individual's preferred function.I've found this is the main factor in determining personality.I'll list the correlations now.{more Fe awareness of how to properly present Ti logic}

EJ = Je
EP = Pe
IJ = Pi
IP = Ji

On the other hand, N/S is essentially a measure of intelligence.It's only natural that a more intelligent person would interact with the world in a different way--for example, where the ESJ sees a system in place and works within it, the more intelligent ENJ sees a malleable system and uses it. They are basically the same, but the ENJ is simply far more adept at what they do, and the same applies to all S/N differences.{Si experience based rationalization}

That said, the S way of thinking does have its own advantages.While it is more rigid and confined, it is also much more focused and sensitive to detail. A world without the S would be much worse off, without question.{Fe judgement}

Conclusion
Yup, that about covers it.{Ti statement}What do you think? {Fe appeal}

That is just an estimate, but it shows the way your mind thinks, imo.
You are innately concerned with phrasing your logic properly, making it precise and understandable to others, and you are also aware of how certain phrasings may come across, and you insert pre-emptive disclaimers to help cushion the hostility that may otherwise form.

This is how Ti-Fe thinks. It is not something you'll find Fi-Te users doing. At least not in this fashion. I know this because I'm Ti(Ne) myself and am aware of this tendency. ;p

Now, according to the four letter code, I would too classify myself as an INXP. Because my dexterity with T and F is right slab in the middle. However, I don't use Fi and Te, I always use Ti and Fe. So I see the issue not with the functions but with the four letter system.

Lets not even label people as either sensors or intuitors, we're all both. Agreed.
Lets not even label people as either thinkers or feelers, we're all both. Agreed.

But rather than meshing them together into one, its possible to understand the four different types of pairings that exist:

Ti+Fe
Te+Fi
Ni+Se
Ne+Si

Personally I can see the dual nature of these processes in most people. Though that may not mean much unless they express themselves as a reality in your life as well. But I would encourage you to try and see the differentiation; I think you'll find it.

Also, welcome to the forum.​