Can your cognitive functions contradict your MBTI?

[Coeur deLion]

Hey all, first time poster. No real background on this, just a typology noob who doesn't see why Beebe and Jung can't get along

1. Is MBTI only a classification of the collective behaviours of a CF stack, and are the cognitive functions of an MBTI (INTP = TiNeSiFeTeNiSeFi) really only intended as some guideline (so you could in theory have an INTP = TiNeFeSiNiFiSeTe or whatever?). Could you possess any order of functions as long as your dominant and auxiliary conform to an MBTI? Or is the TiNeSiFe stack to be taken as gospel?
2. If no to the above, does everyone conform to a certain MBTI's stack of functions, if not always the associated behaviours?
3. Why are the function orientations in e.i.e or i.e.i order? Could you not have both your dominant and auxiliary placed as introverted/extroverted? I've read conflicting views on this, but that Jung himself identified as a TiNi. Or is the preceding of a perceiving function to a judging function and vice versa (in pairings of two i.e. JPPJ or PJJP) the only necessity of CF order?

Thanks in advance!

 

[Latte]

 

[Jennywocky]

1. Is MBTI only a classification of the collective behaviours of a CF stack, and are the cognitive functions of an MBTI (INTP = TiNeSiFeTeNiSeFi) really only intended as some guideline (so you could in theory have an INTP = TiNeFeSiNiFiSeTe or whatever?). Could you possess any order of functions as long as your dominant and auxiliary conform to an MBTI? Or is the TiNeSiFe stack to be taken as gospel?

Well, the theoretical stack is just that. Few people taking a cog function priority test will match the theoretical stack and your results will be 'best fit" rather than literal match. So you still get best "look and feel" but the theory is just theory.

I mean, theoretically people will have unblemished skin and proportional spacing of facial features if you ask the typical person to draw a theoretical human being. They also typically will not be bald. But what do people draw? Someone with two eyes, a nose, and mouth positioned in the "right" spots, with hair, etc. Yet the actual human being will have various blemishes, bumps, deviations in their skin, their features will not be perfectly sized and symmetrical, etc.

So the theoretical standard rarely exactly matches the reality for a particular individual. yet this doesn't mean the theoretical standard is grossly incorrect.

Some people deviate more than others. (For example, my cog func tests often run Ti Ne Ni Fe Si... etc... or swapping of the N's.) But you still get a best fit read by how you answer all the questions. After all, MBTI is trying to put people in 16 general categories, and there are six billion or more people in the world. Not everyone will be in middle of those categories, people will also be on the boundaries.

Dom and Aux are pretty important, though, in how things fall. Typically your top 2-3 functions on the cog func test will include your actual Dom/Aux.... otherwise the test sucks.

2. If no to the above, does everyone conform to a certain MBTI's stack of functions, if not always the associated behaviours?

I think my answer was "yes, they're a guideline" so this one is answered too...

3. Why are the function orientations in e.i.e or i.e.i order? Could you not have both your dominant and auxiliary placed as introverted/extroverted? I've read conflicting views on this, but that Jung himself identified as a TiNi. Or is the preceding of a perceiving function to a judging function and vice versa (in pairings of two i.e. JPPJ or PJJP) the only necessity of CF order?

still debated. Note it's just a theory meant to try to note patterns in and make sense of human processing and behavior. So it has no special way to be confirmed, like we can generally test gravity by tossing something in the air and watching it land on our heads a moment later. It's just a framework to tie certain modes of perception and judging together with behavior. There are so many variables that go into human behavior, with multiple causes and multiple outcomes, that it's more of a "usefulness" thing with MBTI.

I think theoretically it makes more sense to say you need a perceiving function and a judging function to deal with the world, and it makes sense for one to be aimed inward and one to be aimed outward. That doesn't prove it to be true, but i would expect there to be certain behavior differences if that was the case (strengths and weaknesses in displayed personality). *shrug*

I think Jung shows strong Ti and Ni usage, btw. (And it explains why the typical argument is whether he was an INTP or an INFJ. Some people try to split the difference and call him INTJ, but that's not how MBTI works and he doesn't show much Te especially in contrast to his mentor Freud.) How does that translate into MBTI? Well, that's the question.

 

[Coeur deLion]

Thanks for an insightful reply @Jennywocky. So, as it stands at current, someone could validly type as an any function order (granted the JPPJ/PJJP structure) with a 'best fit' MBTI.

 

[nanook]

dichotomies are abstractions and all the tests do it differently, so there is little statistical correlation between test results and cognitive functions.

there is no function order or stack. what looks like order on paper reflects the typologist's way of thinking about which functions of this type are noteworthy to the observer. the tertiary is the shadow of the auxiliary and the inferior is the shadow of the dominant. if you have a dominant and an auxiliary, you will have shadows to them. this is carl jungs observation.

instead of ordering the functions on a piece of paper, you should try to understand their meaning to the person. for instance it appears that the shadow to the dom becomes obvious in how someone orients in life, in the big picture, for example extroverted feeling may turn the Ti type into someone who is quite dutiful and family oriented, but in inflexible ways, possibly a tense family tyrant, as it's a shadow force. Ti tries to dominate and control Fe, Fe tries to take responsibility for the family, hence the family members get dominated from a cold distance. at the same time, due to Fe, the type may allow himself, to become exploited and drained by whatever he perceives to be his family or group. he dislikes his duty, but can't question it, can't let go. while in contrast the shadow to the aux appears occasionally, just like the aux itself is more fluctuating in relevance or obviousness.


for example look at the way the socionics people think of the meaning of the functions, by abstracting categories like ego block and super ego block

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=LII

http://www.wikisocion.org/en/index.php?title=ILI


you have all possibilities in side of yourself and individual skills in temporarily evoking mental perspectives, so your subjective experience could be, that you can 'use' any function in rudimentary ways. but you can't affect your default brain circuit, because this thing has grown with time and it's default, meaning what arises prior to the egos effort to react to it and work with it. we don't know a lot about the default circuit. i don't believe that it makes any sense to think of the functions as a 4 piece chain that is worked through for every thought, this is not my introspective experience at all. the way i see it, all the functions co-arise and influence each other in a non linear fashion.

likewise the cognitive function test that is out there produces notoriously ridiculous and irrelevant results. there is no way of testing the default circuit, which is type.