User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 44

  1. #31
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redcheerio View Post
    This is only vaguely related to the thread, but this cog function test was posted in someone's type-me thread, so I decided to share it and put my results here.

    http://www.keys2cognition.com/explore.htm

    Cognitive Process Level of Development (Preference, Skill and Frequency of Use)

    extraverted Sensing (Se) ***************************** (29.4)
    average use

    introverted Sensing (Si) ******** (8.7)
    unused

    extraverted Intuiting (Ne) ********************************************** (46.6)
    excellent use

    introverted Intuiting (Ni) ********************************** (34.2)
    good use

    extraverted Thinking (Te) ************************* (25)
    average use

    introverted Thinking (Ti) ************************************** (38.7)
    excellent use

    extraverted Feeling (Fe) *************************** (27.9)
    average use

    introverted Feeling (Fi) ****************************** (30.3)
    good use

    So basically, according to these results, I've developed a bit of everything except Si.

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

    However, I understand that this might not actually be the case. I'm still not sure about the distinction between when I'm actually using a function (back to the Te example) and when I'm using my more favored functions in its place to do the same kind of activities. I can believe it's true, but I'd like to understand it better.

    <*goes back to reread what others already wrote about this earlier in the thread*>
    Se: Ne can seem similar to Se, so Ne > Se means "Ne".
    Si: Of course Si seems remote to you. Ne is your dominant function. Si plays a more significant role than you think.
    Ne: your top function.
    Ni: also seems similar to Ne, but you don't really do this.
    Te: seems similar to Ti, but you don't do this.
    Ti: You do this.
    Fe: You'll figure this one out, more or less.
    Fi: No, you don't really do this.

    Don't confuse skills with cognitive functions. (This is why the tests mostly suck, because skills are easily confused with the functions, and the tests can't ask the questions in such a way as to filter out the false positives.)
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  2. #32
    Senior Member redcheerio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    E9
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Np. well the whole point is that you dont use Te if you are ENTP, so there is no developing Te. its about developing each 4 function separately, and learning to use them as separate processes and learn to use them together consciously. Also the deal with functions used together, not as separate conscious functions, but undifferentiated function(s) in sort of chain of functins. the end of the chain where undifferentiated functions chain themselves remains unconscious and has an (usually) negative effect on the other functions in the conscious end of the function chain.

    This process of differentiating functions is called individuation. this is a life long process that according to jung can never be totally accomplished, but you just get further in the process and develop on the way
    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Te focuses on measurement, segmenting, sequencing, structuring, organizing, and logical consequences. In business terms, project planning, status reporting, operational metrics are examples of things that someone who prefers Te will gravitate towards. We decide if something works or doesn't work based on measurable results. We look at objective reality. Te tends to be somewhat black and white. There is right and wrong based on the objective or accepted criteria. If things don't fit on either side then they are considered to not matter. It is applied to a problem of finite scope. Our society as a whole, especially business, is heavily Te oriented. That's why executive leadership positions in business tend to be occupied by people who have Te as a primary or auxiliary function, because the company is measured by objective results - revenue, income, shareholder value, stock prices, etc. So, it plays to the strengths of someone who prefers Te. It's all about results.

    Ti is more nuanced and precise. It's more about analyzing and clarifying ideas. It's about frameworks, principles and models. It's more abstract, holistic and focusing on getting thinking accurate. Stuff like that. I tend to think of Te as being more objective and Ti as being more subjective.

    Do we have to use Te if we're doing project management? Do we have to use Se to drive a car? I think as a cognitive function, it represents a preference for processing things to make decisions/judgments. It doesn't represent the entire working of the human brain or form the whole basis of skills that we develop. The fact that we have learned skills or behaviors that someone who prefers Te would naturally be good at, doesn't necessarily mean that we're using Te in my opinion.
    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    ...With MBTI, we get a classification that supplies two functions: one is perceiving (N/S), the other is judging (T/F); one is extroverted (e), the other is introverted (i); one is dominant, one is auxiliary. Having been classified as such, let's say Ne-Ti, then there are only two "shadow" functions that fit with this, namely Si and Fe. Ne implies the Si shadow and Ti implies the Fe shadow. That gives the first four functions. The remaining four cannot be "shadows" of the first four. Te is not the shadow of Ti, and in fact they really don't "think the same" at all.

    One does wonder whether or not one can "use" the other four functions. After all, we're all human, right? Why can't an ENTP use Ni? Who cares if it's the "8th function" in Beebe's ordering? One ought to be able to do it anyway, right?

    Personally, I believe that one can embody the "first four" to a large degree, coming to terms with one's shadow functions and possibly even gaining great strength of personality by resolving the polarities. (Jung hypothesized a "transcendent function" that would handle these different aspects of the psyche.) I don't believe that one can truly embody the other four, though one can certainly become aware of them in others and understand how to deal with them. One can even learn to behave in ways that emulate these other behaviors, but internally it's not natural.

    If I've spent all my life learning to play the violin and become a virtuoso, I might sort of be able to pick up the piano, but I will never be able to play the piano as well as the violin. The violin has become "who I am", and the piano is always somewhat alien. Perhaps if I abandon the violin and spend countless hours and years practicing the piano and approach near virtuoso level in that, then I'll have lost much of my skill with the violin. Similarly, in theory, it may be possible to learn to work with the patterns inherent in these other four functions, but to really develop them would require "un"-developing the first four functions to some degree.

    Why? Because the archetypes are antithetical. To think in one pattern means to NOT think in the other pattern. The shadows are the exception because they are a complimentary pattern. To mix and match the functions, to say that anyone can do any function, is to assert that the functions are real psychological entities that any human can choose to use or not use at one's leisure, and as such they are no longer archetypes, but skills or talents or what have you.

    I do not categorically deny that one has access to all eight functions, but my experience on these various forums and in real life suggests that the archetypes have very real consequences. I've seen too many people cross-talk on the basis of Ne/Si vs Ni/Se or Te/Fi vs Ti/Fe, which suggests that it is no simple matter to just "start thinking like those other functions." It's as if Ne/Si is kind of a "meta-axiom" that describes how one should organize thoughts, and Te/Fi is how one should judge them, more or less, and these axioms prevent one from seeing Ni/Se thought processes clearly, or from seeing Ti/Fe processes clearly. One knows that those other processes are there, in an abstract way, but they don't quite make sense.

    Now as for your observations that appear to contradict everything I've said; how, as an ENTP, you seem to have access to Te, and you feel like you've used Fi, and you certainly feel that you have way more Se than your INTJ husband. I'm not going to discount any of those feelings. I've been there and done that, too.

    When I've taken Nardi's cognitive function tests (or variations on a theme), I test strong in Ni AND Ne, Te AND Ti, sort of strong in Fi, kind of weak in Si and Se, and very low in Fe. Yet it doesn't explain why some of my worst never-goes-anywhere discussions (especially online) are with INTPs. We ought to be thinking the same, we share so many functions, right? What I came to understand is that what I thought was "Ti" was really Ni in tandem with Te, that "Ne" was also just Ni, and that Fi and Se were more prominent than I'd realized. That means I don't share a single function with an INTP, though on the surface, to others, we'll appear much the same, both being INTx. So while we seem to be the same kind of nerds, when we actually try to share complex ideas, there is a LOT of cross talk, because the INTP is trying to nail down definitions, while I'm trying to just get the gist/meanings of the concepts.

    Now that's just a taste of my experiences, and there's a lot of potential evidence out there. I would suggest, however, that perhaps what you feel is Te is really Fe (they often seem to emulate each other, especially in the workplace - my ESFJ ex-wife loved being "really efficient"), and that your Fi moments were really Fe. (Try telling an Fe dom that they don't really feel deeply and personally most of the time. I'll stand back while your head gets bitten off.) As for your being "more Se" than your INTJ, perhaps you mistake what Se is. It isn't about how good your senses are so much as how aware you are (consciously or unconsciously) of the physical world in the moment. Yes, most of the time, INTJs are completely unaware, but inferior Se kicks in and generally irritates them. They complain about smells that you hardly notice, that sort of thing. As an ENTP, you're going to be very aware of others' concerns (Fe), and you're going to be spotting all sorts of patterns/ideas in the environment (Ne) that your INTJ will never see. So yeah, you're seeing things he doesn't, but perhaps that's Ne and Fe, not Se. This is all just some food for thought; you know yourself far better than I do, of course.

    Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter. I don't claim to be an expert, I'm just sharing.
    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    Se: Ne can seem similar to Se, so Ne > Se means "Ne".
    Si: Of course Si seems remote to you. Ne is your dominant function. Si plays a more significant role than you think.
    Ne: your top function.
    Ni: also seems similar to Ne, but you don't really do this.
    Te: seems similar to Ti, but you don't do this.
    Ti: You do this.
    Fe: You'll figure this one out, more or less.
    Fi: No, you don't really do this.

    Don't confuse skills with cognitive functions. (This is why the tests mostly suck, because skills are easily confused with the functions, and the tests can't ask the questions in such a way as to filter out the false positives.)
    OK, so what is the distinction between functions and skills? (I guess I'm Ti-ing this. )

    Aren't we always using some combination of functions? I can think of times when I'm mostly using Ne, or Ti, or Fe. So if I'm doing an activity that looks like Te but I'm not using Te, does that mean that my internal thought process that I use for this skill is different than how a Te dom would do it?

    How can we tell whether we're using our preferred functions, or developing our shadow functions to do it? Back to what INTP said; does this mean that I have some potentially negative shadow functions going on at the same time that I should be aware of? Or does it just mean I'm using Ne-Ti-Fe (or something like that) to do the same Te-like activity in a less masterful way than a Te user would do it?

  3. #33
    Senior Member redcheerio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    E9
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Another question. How would ADD/ADHD meds affect an Ne dom in terms of function use?

    If Ne activity lights up the brain like a Christmas tree, while ADD meds help them to focus, would that mean it would suppress Ne in favor of Ti and make an ENTP more like an INTP, or would they start becoming more like an ENTJ? If they became more like an ENTJ, would that mean they were developing functions like Te?

    (I've never tried them, but was just wondering. I'm curious whether they transform Ti users into Te users, or if something else is going on.)

  4. #34
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redcheerio View Post
    So if I'm doing an activity that looks like Te but I'm not using Te, does that mean that my internal thought process that I use for this skill is different than how a Te dom would do it?

    Or does it just mean I'm using Ne-Ti-Fe (or something like that) to do the same Te-like activity in a less masterful way than a Te user would do it?
    Yes. there is no shadow functions. people are misusing jungian words, when i say shadow, it just means unconscious(like jung used the word). so if a function is in the shadow, it just means its undeveloped/undifferianted, so its unconscious and links itself to other functions. now when Fe is in the shadow(undeveloped), you have no real control over it and it shows itself through other functions that it links to. for example Fe might link itself to Ti, so now you are unconsciously aiming Ti analysis towards something that Fe wants to analyze(and usually should analyze to get good results). this Ti analyzing over Fe matters will look like retard or handicapped pseudo Fi and this is where the confusion of shadow functions comes from, but its not Fi you are actually using. now this sort of using Ti to Fe matters can lead you to obsess over a thought of something if the unconscious Fe wants it resolved(thus sending instincts for you to concentrate on it), but Ti might not be able to resolve it or might make you act in stupid ways because you are basically controlled by yoir shadow(unconscious).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #35
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redcheerio View Post
    Another question. How would ADD/ADHD meds affect an Ne dom in terms of function use?

    If Ne activity lights up the brain like a Christmas tree, while ADD meds help them to focus, would that mean it would suppress Ne in favor of Ti and make an ENTP more like an INTP, or would they start becoming more like an ENTJ? If they became more like an ENTJ, would that mean they were developing functions like Te?

    (I've never tried them, but was just wondering. I'm curious whether they transform Ti users into Te users, or if something else is going on.)
    I looked up the effect mechanisms of those drugs. basically they inhibit dopamine and noradrenaline from being taken back to synapses that fast, so they make them work for longer periods of time and is basically same as adding them to brains.

    I suggest watching this video:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGfhQTbcqmA

    dopamine increases activity on areas fp1 and fp2(he explains what the areas do in the video).

    Noradrenaline has bit more complicated effects, but what i found doesent affect on cerebral cortex(area that he measures on the video). basically it just increases focus.

    So i dont think they have an effect to Ne, except that when there is info coming elsewhere, you are able to concentrate on that other info instead of just jumping from subject to subject.

    But i cant say for sure about noradrenaline, because i cant find any good info about it.

    But i doubt that it changes brains from Ti to Te, because Te and Ti are basically different wiring on the brains. if it lowers Ne, it does it by increasing Ti.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  6. #36
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    I dont think that hyperactivity can at all be related to a well-functioning N. For example are hyperactivity symptoms related to Ne-doms but why not for example to Ni-doms. Per definition they had to suffer from an equal phaenomena but on a more introverted scale. Still with the majority of Ni-doms noone would call them clutterminded or hyperactive in their thoughts.

    To me N is as well nothing that comes natural, it is a learnt attitude gained by experience. It is about the preference to trust your hunches and those hunches are most often patterns and analogies drawn from your subconcious mind. I for example yesterday watched a movie in the cinema with my girlfriend and we both draw at some point in the movie simoultaneously the conclusion, who the murderer could be tho the movie was at a point when you couldnt prove that theory rationally, but only could say its a hunch.

    The curious thing is that we shared this ability from day one. Someonehow we manage to simoultaneously reach the same conclusion about a situation at the exact same time. We manage to write each other sms at the exact same time, we had from day one a kind of synchronisation in thoughts with each others thats marvellous. Well I am the Ne-dominant and she is infx and she is diagnosed ADD, I was never only remotely diagnosed or suspected of hyperactivity. So here is a problem with ADD - theory and Ne-doms.

    If you take a long look in my past and my girlfriends past, you'll find that in every life stage we had similiar intrests, sometimes even the same intrests. She is like a clone of me or I am a clone of her at times, its really mysterious at times. Regarding our life experiences we made similiar experiences and our attitudes towards life are the same or similiar as well. So we have a sort of shared experience, a pool of experience we both can rely to and its very similiar.

    I am not quite sure with my theory, but still my theory is that an N does rely more on the patterns and analogies that are formed in the subconcious, meaning the subconcious has a strong influence on our presence. When I for example watch a movie or read a long text, it's like the important or relevant parts are immediantly highlighted to me, like someone would light them up or mark them. Thats no sole Ne quality, cause my girlfriend doesnt have that, her greatest problem is finding focus, so I am attributing that to NeTi. Still she does have the same insights like I have about situations and since she has problems to focus, it cant be that she is just good at analyzing.

    A S in this theory simply wouldnt rely on the subconcious but on the factual, following the motto "what I cant see, doesnt exist". He'd be the "I play it safe with reality type" and he'ld focus on the factual in that regards and become a master of dealing with it.

    there is one problem to this theory and that is enthusiasm. I dont know the role of enthusiasm in the whole thing. it could be that me and my girl reach the same conclusions, because since we are both contempt with each others attitudes and opinions, its easier for us to be enthusiastic about each others ideas in an instant. What speaks against that is that just the moment before I had an idea my girlfriend tells me she had an idea and it was the same like I just had, so I basically wasnt influenced by her.

    I dunno its worth more thinking, but I think its definitly wrong to too strongly connect ADD or hyperactivity with Ne. The obvious solution is not always the right one.
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

  7. #37
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by redcheerio View Post
    OK, so what is the distinction between functions and skills? (I guess I'm Ti-ing this. )
    Skills = "What you know how to do."
    Functions = "How you choose what to do."

    It's easy to make the confusion because people familiar with functions will treat them as "verbs" as you just did, as a kind of shorthand.

    I find the distinction to be particularly clear when trying to teach/explain something to someone else. I can teach/explain ideas and skills and so on. I can't teach "how to think." I have always found it odd that so many people couldn't "look at problems" the way I do. It didn't even occur to me that they looked at problems completely differently, and they can't teach me how they think about problems.


    Aren't we always using some combination of functions? I can think of times when I'm mostly using Ne, or Ti, or Fe. So if I'm doing an activity that looks like Te but I'm not using Te, does that mean that my internal thought process that I use for this skill is different than how a Te dom would do it?
    Yeah, pretty much.

    How can we tell whether we're using our preferred functions, or developing our shadow functions to do it? Back to what INTP said; does this mean that I have some potentially negative shadow functions going on at the same time that I should be aware of? Or does it just mean I'm using Ne-Ti-Fe (or something like that) to do the same Te-like activity in a less masterful way than a Te user would do it?
    Well it's kind of like breathing. In order to breathe in, you must breathe out, and vice versa. You don't get to do just one. To "use" a function, you must also "use" its opposite.

    Using the breathing analogy, we mostly think of breathing as "breathing in", while we would classify "breathing out" as "blowing." So, we might be tempted to think that we only breathe in, which is of course nonsense, but for abstract notions such as how we organize things in our minds, it isn't obvious that breathing and blowing are "the same thing" even if opposites. Now imagine only consciously breathing in: drawing in breath would be controlled, graceful, easy, but breathing out would be haphazard, but we would still necessarily do it, if only to breathe in again.

    This is how the shadow works, if you read his type theory: if one uses Ti, the Fe side breaks out as an uncharacteristic aspect of one's personality, for example. But in order to think about things in a Ti way, by arranging part of one's mind that way, the other part of the mind has to be arranged in its mirror image.

    So the realization that you are necessarily thinking both ways is key to self-understanding. You differentiate the "shadow" (I believe Jung overused the word in the typological sense, somewhat conflating it with other sets of archetypes he used) by recognizing that you do behave/think that way, and it can thus become conscious. Upon becoming conscious, one can more easily develop skills that are in sync with that mode of thought (Ti types becoming more socially aware, and thus more socially skilled, for example). I should point out that it doesn't "become conscious" in a clear, distinct way, but rather one gradually becomes more self-aware. "Developing one's shadow" is the task of a lifetime. Actually, I'd say developing one's primary function(s) is also the task of a lifetime, one just happens to have a head start in that case.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  8. #38
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Uumlau is using definitions for shadow and archetype from other people than jung. those words mean different things to other than jung. then he tries to apply these meanings from others to what jung writes and this leads him to have distorted view on what jung means.

    There is no mirror image of function used, Ne doesent need Ni.

    Like you mentioned earlier the christmas tree figure, thats Ne. Ni isnt some mirror image of christmas tree. Ni shows itself on very different manner measured with EEG. its mainly the area of T6, T6 area handles (when simplified) future projection.

    Ne on the other hand is cross-contextual thinking, this is totally different from future projection and isnt any sort of opposite of future projection of Ni.

    Cross-contextual thinking is for example done when trying to figure out a metaphor for something, drawing a picture of love or explaining something. or there is this commercial that representa cross-contextual thinking perfectly. its a commercial for some healthy drink that has calsium, vitamins etc. so it makes your bones stronger and you healthier in many ways(better immune system etc.). there is dad trying to explain for a kid why it is good to drink it and explaining its benefits. the dad goes around and around the subject trying to explain things about calcium etc. the kid naturally has bit hard time getting this, but then he asks "so, its like this bicycle helmed protecting me, but from inside?". this how the kid understood the ramblings of the dad and put it in different context, that still has the same fundamentals, is cross-contextual thinking and pretty much is the definition of Ne. this isnt needed for future projection of Ni and from what i have noticed, INTJs are total retards when it comes to this sort of cross contextual thinking, instead they need to combine observable facts from external world(Se) and see how these facts could be put together by thinking possibilities that these facts have in them and projecting them in future(and see how it fits to other stuff that seem to also be in the future).
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #39
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Uumlau is using definitions for shadow and archetype from other people than jung. those words mean different things to other than jung. then he tries to apply these meanings from others to what jung writes and this leads him to have distorted view on what jung means.

    There is no mirror image of function used, Ne doesent need Ni.
    Ne doesn't need Si?
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  10. #40
    resonance entropie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    entp
    Enneagram
    783
    Posts
    16,761

    Default

    w/o Si I wouldnt know what to rebel against
    [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tEBvftJUwDw&t=0s[/URL]

Similar Threads

  1. Cognitive functions in use test?
    By Jacobman77 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-04-2015, 10:20 AM
  2. Testing cognitive function theories using document classification
    By funtensity in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-02-2013, 07:50 PM
  3. [MBTItm] When an introvert acts "extrovert", which cognitive function does he use?
    By j-zero in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-09-2010, 02:33 PM
  4. Why don't we all have the same avatars?
    By Nonsensical in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 35
    Last Post: 12-29-2009, 12:10 AM
  5. Cognitive Functions - I don't get it.
    By IXTJ in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-25-2008, 10:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO