• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Costrin's Super Amazing Function Definitions

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
This thread is kind of a gestalt of various theories I've posted around about the functions.
Please note, these are just my current theories (or maybe not, if I haven't updated in a while), none of these are set in stone. I welcome debate if you disagree.

There are 8 functions. They are divided into 4 Perceiving functions (which gather information), and 4 Judging functions (which determine what to do with the information). Perceiving then further divided into Sensing and iNtuition, both of which come in extroverted and introverted varieties. Likewise, Judging is divided into Feeling and Thinking.

Everyone uses all 8 functions, to varying degrees. It's the role (and not strength) that you use each function in that determines your type. Your type is determined by your primary and secondary function. Pi and Je are paired together, and Pe and Ji are paired together. For the record, I believe that IPs lead with a juding function, and IJs lead with a perceiving function.

A function is like a muscle, it is strengthened by using it, and atrophies when unused.
S - 5 senses data.
N - Ideas.
T - Objective Judging.
F - Subjective Judging.

Extroverted Functions - Linear.
Introverted Functions - Webbed.

Introverted functions store the fruits of their labor in memory.

Everything starts with perception. Each of the 4 perceiving functions interprets the data in a different way, and passes that on to the judging function, which then decided what to do with the information.

Pe gathers external data and gives it to Ji.
Pi also gathers external data, but also connects the data together. Compares new data to the model it has and gives that information to Je. It can also reevaluate data already collected.

Ji builds an internal model with building blocks acquired from Pe.
Je builds an external model with blueprints acquired from Pi.


Function Definitions:

Se - Gathers 5 senses data. Least amount of interpretation of any of the functions. Passes on "pure" information to Ji.

Si - Gathers 5 senses data. Connects that data to other data and stores that model. In this way, the present situation can remind and even transport the user into the past. Gives that model to Je to build externally.

Ne - Gathers external ideas and explores the possibilities. Follows the threads from one idea to new ones. Passes on these possibilities to Ji.

Ni - Gathers external ideas, and discovers the connections to other stored ideas. Leads to "mystical insights" into how one idea leads to another. Gives model to Je to build externally.

Ti - Uses building blocks from Pe to build a model of the universe. Evaluates each piece of data, and determines where it belongs.

Te - Uses blueprints provided by Pi to recreate internal model in the external world using objective methods.

Fi - Uses building blocks from Pe to build a model of the universe. Evaluates each piece of data according to how it makes one feel emotionally, and constructs a value system.

Fe - Uses blueprints provided by Pi to recreate internal model in the external world using external value system. Adopts a group and their values and uses those values as a criterion.

Instead of retyping stuff, I'll just link this thread:
Thread where I write about function stuff.


The effects of this:

IPs can be just as stubborn as EJs, due to leading with a judging function. However, IPs gather data externally, which can help offset this, but that internal model can be hard to break.

TiNe and Ni can appear very similiar. Both develop internal connections between ideas. Difference is that Ni discovers the connections, Ti makes them. Ti's connections are more "real". Also, Je is very obviously differrent from Ne. Also, I suspect this (along with this) is why many people think INTPs have Ni.

T isn't inherently logical, instead it takes the object and it's qualities, without assigning subjective judgment.

Ne and Ni are effectively the same process, just applied either externally or internally, which is why Ns are differentiated more by T/F. The same does not hold true for Se and Si, and N/S is the most different, which is why you get SJ, SP, NF, and NT.

E/I is determined by how much focus you place on your E or I functions.

Pi can gather data externally or internally.

Fi is logical. But instead of dealing with objective data, it deals with subjective, ie, how it makes you feel. Otherwise, it functions essentially the same as Ti. I suspect this is why many IFPs have trouble typing themselves.


Ts and Emotions:

(hoo boy, getting real deep in theoretical territory here)

Emotions are reactions meant to motivate you away from negative situations, and towards positive situations.

Their primary purpose is survival.

Ts, being more objective, are less effected by emotions because they have learned (perhaps subconsciously) that it is more effective to not act on their emotions.

However, everyone has emotions. Emotions must be expressed, otherwise they will express themselves.

Emotions can only be expressed if these conditions are met.
1. The emotion is known.
2. The emotion is understood.
3. There is an empathic connection.

In actuality, the person only has to believe there is an empathic connection, even if the other person (or object, or even yourself) won't understand.


So um... ya. More to come later, maybe.
 
Last edited:

Owl

desert pelican
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
717
MBTI Type
INTP
T - Objective Judging.
F - Subjective Judging.

How do you define "objective" and "subjective"?

Everything starts with perception. Each of the 4 perceiving functions interprets the data in a different way, and passes that on to the judging function, which then decided what to do with the information.

Please define "interpret".

TiNe and Ni can appear very similiar. Both develop internal connections between ideas. Difference is that Ni discovers the connections, Ti makes them. Ti's connections are more "real". Also, Je is very obviously differrent from Ne. Also, I suspect this (along with this) is why many people think INTPs have Ni.

What do you mean by "discovering" and "making" connections? How are they different?


Emotions can only be expressed if these conditions are met.
1. The emotion is known.
2. The emotion is understood.
3. There is an empathic connection.

In actuality, the person only has to believe there is an empathic connection, even if the other person (or object, or even yourself) won't understand.

What's an empathic connection?
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
How do you define "objective" and "subjective"?

Objective - "unbiased"
Subjective - "biased"

F applies a personal judgment to it, T does not.

Please define "interpret".

The 5 senses pump data into the brain, and each of the 4 perceiving functions takes that data and does something different with it.

What do you mean by "discovering" and "making" connections? How are they different?

Ti and Ni have different attitudes. Ni finds the connections between ideas, which can lead to an INJs seeming confidence, as their Ni found the connection, it clearly exists, can't you see it? While Ti operates more like a kid with a bunch of legos (and each lego is an idea provided by Ne). You have a shape in mind (the universe), and there's only so many ways you can put together the legos you have into that shape. But because Ti made the connections, it's less sure about them, as you can never be sure that your way is the right one. But at the same time, Ti's connections are made out of physical stuff, and a bunch of legos can take quite a bit of time to dismantle, while Ni's connections don't physically exist, so therefore can discarded easier if shown incorrect.

What's an empathic connection?

Good question, ask a feeler. :p

Really though, I think it's just that feeling you get when the person on the receiving end understands you.
 

speculative

Feelin' FiNe
Joined
Jul 15, 2008
Messages
927
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Good question, ask a feeler. :p

Really though, I think it's just that feeling you get when the person on the receiving end understands you.

Sympathy is when you understand why someone is feeling a certain way; empathy is when you actually feel their emotions as though they were your own. (If you are using a nontraditional use of empathy you may want to define it further...)
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
Sympathy is when you understand why someone is feeling a certain way; empathy is when you actually feel their emotions as though they were your own. (If you are using a nontraditional use of empathy you may want to define it further...)

Well first, this is from the perspective of the one with the emotion. Whether the other person actually feels the emotion or not is irrelevant, only whether the emotionee (I'll make up words if I want to) feels that there is such a connection.

Second, I don't think empathy as defined above actually exists, because 100% understanding is impossible. Nevertheless, humans can understand each other at least somewhat, or we wouldn't be here on this forum. So what exactly is an empathic connection? I don't know, but I do the effects are that the emotionee feels he is being understood.
 

sculpting

New member
Joined
Jan 28, 2009
Messages
4,148
Ts and Emotions:

(hoo boy, getting real deep in theoretical territory here)

Emotions are reactions meant to motivate you away from negative situations, and towards positive situations.

Their primary purpose is survival.

Ts, being more objective, are less effected by emotions because they have learned (perhaps subconsciously) that it is more effective to not act on their emotions.

.


Emotions seem based partially on empathy. empathy can be observed even amongst animals as part of the reciprocal glue that holds social groups together. I scratch your back you scratch mine. The equation equals survival but the actual math is fueled by chemicals that make us "feel" with respect to the others in the group. This empathy will hold and animals will care for other sick animals until they become so sick they endanger the herd, at which point they are (and let themselves be) abandoned.

So emotions are not a weakness that thinkers can surpass. They are a biological need that thinkers missed out on.

Explain more about Ji Je Pi Pe. you lost me there.
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
Emotions seem based partially on empathy. empathy can be observed even amongst animals as part of the reciprocal glue that holds social groups together. I scratch your back you scratch mine. The equation equals survival but the actual math is fueled by chemicals that make us "feel" with respect to the others in the group. This empathy will hold and animals will care for other sick animals until they become so sick they endanger the herd, at which point they are (and let themselves be) abandoned.

So emotions are not a weakness that thinkers can surpass. They are a biological need that thinkers missed out on.

I wasn't intending to imply that at all. Instead, I'm suggesting that Thinkers have discovered another way to go through the world, ie objective judging. Clearly though, objective judging isn't the end all of everything. If you get to stuck in objectivity, then you lose all drive.

Explain more about Ji Je Pi Pe. you lost me there.

Ji - introverted judging - Ti and Fi
Je - extroverted judging - Te and Fe
Pi - introverted perceiving - Si and Ni
Pe - extroverted perceiving - Se and Ne
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
This was sort of what my understanding was like about a year ago. Internally consistent, but way overcomplicated, and not correlated well enough to Jung.

I could explain my entire understanding of the system right now, but I'm tired and lazy.

Seriously, though, I came to almost exactly the same conclusions at one point in my research.
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
This was sort of what my understanding was like about a year ago. Internally consistent, but way overcomplicated, and not correlated well enough to Jung.

I could explain my entire understanding of the system right now, but I'm tired and lazy.

Seriously, though, I came to almost exactly the same conclusions at one point in my research.

I'd be interested in hearing your ideas when you have the time.
 
B

beyondaurora

Guest
Extroverted Functions - Linear.
Introverted Functions - Webbed.

Function Definitions:

Se - Gathers 5 senses data. Least amount of interpretation of any of the functions. Passes on "pure" information to Ji.

Si - Gathers 5 senses data. Connects that data to other data and stores that model. In this way, the present situation can remind and even transport the user into the past. Gives that model to Je to build externally.

Ne - Gathers external ideas and explores the possibilities. Follows the threads from one idea to new ones. Passes on these possibilities to Ji.

Ni - Gathers external ideas, and discovers the connections to other stored ideas. Leads to "mystical insights" into how one idea leads to another. Gives model to Je to build externally.

Ti - Uses building blocks from Pe to build a model of the universe. Evaluates each piece of data, and determines where it belongs.

Te - Uses blueprints provided by Pi to recreate internal model in the external world using objective methods.

Fi - Uses building blocks from Pe to build a model of the universe. Evaluates each piece of data according to how it makes one feel emotionally, and constructs a value system.

Fe - Uses blueprints provided by Pi to recreate internal model in the external world using external value system. Adopts a group and their values and uses those values as a criterion.

Costrin - Very nicely done. The way you describe the functions is very clear and succinct. I love your one-word descriptors for the extroverted and introverted functions (linear/webbed). Thanks!
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Sympathy is when you understand why someone is feeling a certain way; empathy is when you actually feel their emotions as though they were your own. (If you are using a nontraditional use of empathy you may want to define it further...)

I cannot say I have ever identified with this definition of empathy, so have never related to 'feeling the others emotions as if they were my own'. I guess I first understand why someone feels a certain way, and/or imagine what it would be like if I were them, or if the same happened to me. But I can't say I ever feel what they're feeling. I might feel for them, or feel badly for them, etc etc, but my own emotions are quite distinct from theirs and those boundaries definitely exist.

Costrin - I don't have any specific comments to make, but think you have a lot of good info in that initial post. The only thing I'm not certain I agree with is the objective/subjective, "unbiased"/"biased" breakdown in distinguishing between T/F, but I would need to put more thought into how I would word it/define it differently, if even possible.
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
I cannot say I have ever identified with this definition of empathy, so have never related to 'feeling the others emotions as if they were my own'. I guess I first understand why someone feels a certain way, and/or imagine what it would be like if I were them, or if the same happened to me. But I can't say I ever feel what they're feeling. I might feel for them, or feel badly for them, etc etc, but my own emotions are quite distinct from theirs and those boundaries definitely exist.

I envy you, then.

When people do something that I imagine would embarrass them, I often feel more embarrassed than they do.

When people lose something close to them, I'm often more hurt than they are (at first, at least). When one of my best friends died a few years ago, I didn't cry at the funeral until I saw his parents speak, and then I cried for them.

It's definitely an annoying curse.

(But I agree with you, it isn't Fe.)
 

cascadeco

New member
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
9,083
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I envy you, then.

When people do something that I imagine would embarrass them, I often feel more embarrassed than they do.

When people lose something close to them, I'm often more hurt than they are (at first, at least). When one of my best friends died a few years ago, I didn't cry at the funeral until I saw his parents speak, and then I cried for them.

It's definitely an annoying curse.

(But I agree with you, it isn't Fe.)

Hmm....well, when you give all of those examples...I don't know. Perhaps it boils down to semantics. I am thinking of extreme examples, like if someone is really depressed or angry or whatever, I don't then become that way automatically, or spiral down with them. If I learn why they are angry and I am equally angered by what made them angry, then I might become angry, but that's me becoming angry of my own accord, not just taking their anger on [but anger is a poor example, as I rarely get angry]. Because it very well may be that I won't personally be able to relate to their anger, or I may personally feel their anger is unjustified given the circumstances, in which case I won't be angry, but I'll try to understand, etc, and still lend a supportive ear.

Your embarassment example is a good one, and I may be similar to you w/ that. Maybe that's tied to Fe, as I'm hypersensitive to emotions/reactions that I see in a crowd of people, so I'll know when the person is being mocked at/laughed at/whatever, even if the person doesn't know it himself. But again, I'm not certain I myself become embarassed..but maybe I do, who knows. :) It's more of a thing where I sense ripples/undercurrents in the overall crowd or mentality, and so anything that causes those ripples is something that I pick up on.

Same goes with my mom in social settings. My mom lacks a lot of social grace and can be quite tactless, bordering on rude, at times, and I tend to internally cringe on her behalf when she says things. Not because she's feeling it, because she's not -- but because I know what other peoples' reactions to her will be.

Perhaps everything I've described DOES mean I feel other peoples' emotions, but I guess I have never personally looked at it that way. ha.;)
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
When people do something that I imagine would embarrass them, I often feel more embarrassed than they do.

Hmm... interestingly, I can sometimes do this too...
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Everyone uses all 8 functions, to varying degrees. It's the role (and not strength) that you use each function in that determines your type. Your type is determined by your primary and secondary function. Pi and Je are paired together, and Pe and Ji are paired together. For the record, I believe that IPs lead with a juding function, and IJs lead with a perceiving function.

Ya.

A function is like a muscle, it is strengthened by using it, and atrophies when unused. You can only use one function at a time, though you can switch rapidly, especially between a perceving function and it's judging partner.

I actually disagree here. There needs to be a distinction made between judging and perceiving -- which is the same thing as saying conscious (T and F) vs. unconscious (S and N).

I think perceiving is actually pretty amorphous. You could claim that only one perceiving function happens at one time, but the whole point is that it's unconscious, meaning there is no way to access it. That's the reason these functions are called irrational. Because we can't really figure out what they're doing, we just know the inputs and outputs. I think Intuition and Sensing can, and have to happen simultaneously (in fact, I don't really think there's anything much different about them, other than an arbitrary label.) They depend on each other.

So my idea is that the perceiving functions can happen at the same time. The judging cannot (because it is conscious). But judging and perceiving can take place at the same time (because the conscious and unconscious don't necessarily contradict each other; hopefully they help each other).

S - 5 senses data.
N - Ideas.
T - Objective Judging.
F - Subjective Judging.

Extroverted Functions - Linear.
Introverted Functions - Webbed.

Introverted functions store the fruits of their labor in memory.

Okay here's where I'm gonna define things quite differently.

The functions are supposed to split all of cognition into 8 mutually exclusive compartments that add back together to make the whole (no parts missing). There are a few things I've realized trying to figure this out.

1, there's no chance of separately defining all the functions and hoping they add up to everything without overlapping. Therefore the only way it will work is by taking all of cognition and dividing it.

2, the more functions doing different things, the more complicated and confusing everything gets. I chose to solve this by throwing out the idea that an introverted function is different from its extroverted counterpart. In my understanding, there are 4 functions: Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition. There are tendencies within these functions to cater to the extroverted world where signs and symbols are taken for granted, or the introverted world where the equivalent of signs and symbols are unconscious tendencies and themes.

All functions point somewhat in both directions. Also, all functions are used together all the time, the perceiving ones at least multiple times a second, and the judging ones at least every few seconds of waking life. Sensing, to take in and unconsciously process sensory data, and to take care of all automatic body function. Intuition, to break down that information into manageable chunks and themes, to change scope, etc. Thinking, to throw away ideas that bubble to consciousness from the perceiving functions that don't make sense or verify those that do. And importantly, Feeling, to decide whether the ideas that come to consciousness are worth something.

So actually, the perceiving functions do most of the work, because they decide what the judging functions even see. And everything behind the scenes is the work of S and N. Judging can always be explained (the premises may be questioned, but whatever). Perceiving can only be explained if it decides to pass to consciousness the explanation. :)



So here's my take on how to explain the definitions of introversion and extroversion when applied to functions. I'm gonna explain it differently for judging and for perceiving, as they are vastly different "functions" -- "unconscious" and "conscious" work much better.

So for judging functions, extroversion is the amount with which external signs and symbols are taken for granted. Evidence (current, too...tangible) is all, and hypotheticals have no weight on their own (unless they are passed in by perceiving specifically to check against evidence). Introversion is the amount of weight given to ideas, feelings, hypotheticals...anything going on inside the mind. But Thinking and Feeling themselves, they are just deductive processes. Thinking says "true" or "false". Feeling says "good" (meaning, good for me) or "bad". The premises that perceiving passes in, those are really all that matter, or even determine whether a function is being used in an introverted or extroverted way. If we take that logic even further, we could even claim that Thinking and Feeling are the same -- some of the premises perceiving can pass in make judging look like Thinking, others make judging look like Feeling. It's actually the perceiving functions with the preferences. But anyways, sometimes it's useful to make the distinction between "good"/"bad" judgments and "true"/"false" judgments, which is the point of the distinction in the first place.

And this is why everything is stored in the perceiving functions. Judging functions are really nothing by themselves. But perceiving functions are. They can do things without the conscious mind even knowing. They can make you block a punch -- they don't need to look through some sort of "thinking database" to figure out if it's true that blocking a punch saves you from harm. Nor a "feeling database" that would say whether blocking the punch is good.

Anyway, back to introversion/extroversion...so...perceiving functions. Introversion of a perceiving function is like a feedback loop. The more introverted the P function, the more it focuses on the data that is relevant to the current unconscious process (and the less it focuses on ALL data). The more extroverted the P function, the less it cares about what it's doing and the more it picks up ALL information it possibly has access to. So Pi is hopelessly looped on itself, with absolutely no chance of getting out of its own confirmation bias (because it only sees what it wants). But Pe cares hopelessly much about every single piece of data in the world. A pure Pe couldn't think anything about his or herself. So the way it's set up, Pi (or, the half of the spectrum I refer to when I say that) is focused on depth at the cost of breadth. And vice versa.


So, now, instead of separately defining everything, I defined the functions by dividing consciousness in two (judging perceiving), then in two((thinking feeling) (sensing intuition)), then into infinity (or not dividing again at all, depending on how you look at it), breaking each function into an entire spectrum of introversion to extroversion.

There is a kind of odd implication from my explanation, though (which there are with others, too, and I guess I'm trying to claim mine has fewer flaws than the others):

Sensing vs. Intuition is a silly distinction to make in people, at least when referring to using either Sensing more or Intuition more. The truth is, almost all data that gets sent to consciousness to analyze is sent from Intuition. Who cares whether a photon of light on the retina is "true" or "good" when it clearly hit the the retina in the first place and nothing can be done to change it? Who cares about how "good" it is that you kick your leg out when the doctor hits that spot below your knee? Thinking and Feeling are almost entirely wasted on information from Sensation. So the distinction I've made between Sensing and Intuition is not useful.

But, oddly, I can't think (Intuit, I should say :)) of any other way to explain the function definitions. Which sort of leads me to my 2nd point. I don't think it makes sense to define these "spectrums" of T vs. F and S vs. N by which function is used more. I think the only way to distinguish is to find a grouping in the data in which it makes sense to use different labels. 50/50 is just silly. So we can keep the types we have, not because it's actually true that anyone uses T more than F (I doubt anyone even comes close), but because there are natural groupings in the data, and the "T"s generally fall on one side, the Fs on the other. There are always outliers, though.

We also have to remember that T and F aren't actually in opposition. Someone could use 10 T points and 5 F points (points, I'm assuming, would scale it back to a 50/50 divide) and be a T. But someone else could use 12 T points and 13 F points and be an F, even if they're more T than the T.

I'm sure I'm forgetting something, I always do. I'll post more later.
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
Interesting. I previously thought of possibility of reducing the functions even more to just T, F, S, and N, and maybe even more to just Judging and Perceiving (kinda like, how in the end, everything in math is just the 4 basic operations (even then, you could reduce further)). However, I wasn't (and still not (haven't thought it out enough yet)) sure whether that would be better or not. Simpler is better, but not at the cost of explanatory power.

It's pretty clear to me though that the functions are more similiar than they are different.

I'll ask more specific questions as I digest this.
 
G

garbage

Guest
I envy you, then.

When people do something that I imagine would embarrass them, I often feel more embarrassed than they do.

When people lose something close to them, I'm often more hurt than they are (at first, at least). When one of my best friends died a few years ago, I didn't cry at the funeral until I saw his parents speak, and then I cried for them.

It's definitely an annoying curse.

(But I agree with you, it isn't Fe.)

I do the same, but likely not to the same degree. It'd be nice to be completely detached from others' problems, but then it can be great feeling so involved, too.

And it's definitely not Fe. My ENFJ friend likes to take care of the people he cares about, but doesn't even comprehend the concept of empathy. When I'd tear up telling stories of some of my other friends' hardships, he thought I must be doing so because they hurt me, or I was directly involved, or I lost something because of their experiences, or something.. but in my mind, I was essentially reliving the process of seeing what they were going through.

That's not to say that FJ's can't exhibit empathy, just that Fe doesn't describe it.
 

Hendo Barbarosa

New member
Joined
Dec 26, 2008
Messages
197
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
This is a damn fine thread, right here!

The only thing I would be more specific about in the explanation (assuming it was for someone who I guess knew NOTHING of cognitive functions) would be to be more explicit about how thinking and feeling, being verbs, and therefore requiring the action of judging, are judging functions, likewise the same re-iteration of Sense and Intuition being perceiving functions because it is how we observe the world. That might seem like a no-brainer, yeah, but I just felt it could've been mentioned when ramping up to the rest, for an easier time.
 

Costrin

rawr
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
2,320
MBTI Type
ENTP
Enneagram
5w4
So I finally decided to do something with this thread again.

This is a damn fine thread, right here!

The only thing I would be more specific about in the explanation (assuming it was for someone who I guess knew NOTHING of cognitive functions) would be to be more explicit about how thinking and feeling, being verbs, and therefore requiring the action of judging, are judging functions, likewise the same re-iteration of Sense and Intuition being perceiving functions because it is how we observe the world. That might seem like a no-brainer, yeah, but I just felt it could've been mentioned when ramping up to the rest, for an easier time.

It was meant for people who are already somewhat familiar with the theory (well in actuality, it was meant more for myself, and for others to comment on the validity of my theory). But no harm in doing so, eh?

I actually disagree here. There needs to be a distinction made between judging and perceiving -- which is the same thing as saying conscious (T and F) vs. unconscious (S and N).

I think perceiving is actually pretty amorphous. You could claim that only one perceiving function happens at one time, but the whole point is that it's unconscious, meaning there is no way to access it. That's the reason these functions are called irrational. Because we can't really figure out what they're doing, we just know the inputs and outputs. I think Intuition and Sensing can, and have to happen simultaneously (in fact, I don't really think there's anything much different about them, other than an arbitrary label.) They depend on each other.

So my idea is that the perceiving functions can happen at the same time. The judging cannot (because it is conscious). But judging and perceiving can take place at the same time (because the conscious and unconscious don't necessarily contradict each other; hopefully they help each other).

Yeah that makes a lot more sense than my poorly thought out thingamabobx except for the bolded part. In my experience, I sometimes have to focus (and can, which is the point) to access Sensing, to be able to notice physical details. I have to keep watch and concentrate or my mind quickly starts to wander.

Lots of stuff.

One of the things I've encountered in my research, is the idea that different functions are mapped to different regions of the brain, like so:

brain-regions.gif


I haven't really looked into this too much, and I'm not sure the validity of it, but this doesn't seem compatible with your ideas.

On the other hand...

I chose to solve this by throwing out the idea that an introverted function is different from its extroverted counterpart.

I think I agree with this. It's the same process, just applied either externally or internally. But this seems to have some interesting effects on how they work, which is why to me, it seems useful to define explicitly the differences.

All functions point somewhat in both directions. Also, all functions are used together all the time, the perceiving ones at least multiple times a second, and the judging ones at least every few seconds of waking life. Sensing, to take in and unconsciously process sensory data, and to take care of all automatic body function. Intuition, to break down that information into manageable chunks and themes, to change scope, etc. Thinking, to throw away ideas that bubble to consciousness from the perceiving functions that don't make sense or verify those that do. And importantly, Feeling, to decide whether the ideas that come to consciousness are worth something.

[....]

So for judging functions, extroversion is the amount with which external signs and symbols are taken for granted. Evidence (current, too...tangible) is all, and hypotheticals have no weight on their own (unless they are passed in by perceiving specifically to check against evidence). Introversion is the amount of weight given to ideas, feelings, hypotheticals...anything going on inside the mind.

This doesn't seem the case for me. It seems its more about how much of the process is internal versus external. It seems that Judging not only judges information, but uses that information to build with, either internally or externally. Essentially, they build what they see, in a kinda "monkey see, monkey do" process. So Ti builds a model of the universe in my head according to what Perceiving gathers. Te does the same thing, except it does it in the external world. Your definitions don't include what drives one to actually do anything, only how the information is gathered and assessed.

And this is why everything is stored in the perceiving functions. Judging functions are really nothing by themselves. But perceiving functions are. They can do things without the conscious mind even knowing. They can make you block a punch -- they don't need to look through some sort of "thinking database" to figure out if it's true that blocking a punch saves you from harm. Nor a "feeling database" that would say whether blocking the punch is good.

Hmm, at what point does instinct start and cognitive functions begin? This assumes that Judging functions work slowly. But I could see this as maybe being true. I suppose either explanation works (Judging being fast, Perceiving being able to "judge", or a third explanation, its some other process entirely).

Anyway, back to introversion/extroversion...so...perceiving functions. Introversion of a perceiving function is like a feedback loop. The more introverted the P function, the more it focuses on the data that is relevant to the current unconscious process (and the less it focuses on ALL data). The more extroverted the P function, the less it cares about what it's doing and the more it picks up ALL information it possibly has access to. So Pi is hopelessly looped on itself, with absolutely no chance of getting out of its own confirmation bias (because it only sees what it wants). But Pe cares hopelessly much about every single piece of data in the world. A pure Pe couldn't think anything about his or herself. So the way it's set up, Pi (or, the half of the spectrum I refer to when I say that) is focused on depth at the cost of breadth. And vice versa.

I can't argue against this, it makes too much sense!

Sensing vs. Intuition is a silly distinction to make in people, at least when referring to using either Sensing more or Intuition more. The truth is, almost all data that gets sent to consciousness to analyze is sent from Intuition. Who cares whether a photon of light on the retina is "true" or "good" when it clearly hit the the retina in the first place and nothing can be done to change it? Who cares about how "good" it is that you kick your leg out when the doctor hits that spot below your knee? Thinking and Feeling are almost entirely wasted on information from Sensation. So the distinction I've made between Sensing and Intuition is not useful.

Hmm... Well it makes sense to me, but I have a different definitions of Thinking and Feeling.

Hmm... I also seem to define Sensing slightly different. Sensing doesn't just give to Thinking and Feeling the information that a photon of light hit your retina, it interprets the photon of light, converts it into an image, and that gets passed on to Judging. iNtuition doesn't do this though. That's why Ns are prone to "space cadet-ness".

On the other hand, Intuition is annoyingly hard to define. It's one of those things, "I know it when I see it".

not because it's actually true that anyone uses T more than F (I doubt anyone even comes close)

Could you elaborate on this?

We also have to remember that T and F aren't actually in opposition. Someone could use 10 T points and 5 F points (points, I'm assuming, would scale it back to a 50/50 divide) and be a T. But someone else could use 12 T points and 13 F points and be an F, even if they're more T than the T.

Yup, I agree with this.


Also, since you didn't address this, why does it happen that an introverted perceiving seems to get paired with an extroverted judging, and vice versa?
 

redacted

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2007
Messages
4,223
Yeah that makes a lot more sense than my poorly thought out thingamabobx except for the bolded part. In my experience, I sometimes have to focus (and can, which is the point) to access Sensing, to be able to notice physical details. I have to keep watch and concentrate or my mind quickly starts to wander.

I guess I meant, not that we can't access it, but that we can't really know if two perceiving functions can happen at the same time.

One of the things I've encountered in my research, is the idea that different functions are mapped to different regions of the brain, like so:

brain-regions.gif


I haven't really looked into this too much, and I'm not sure the validity of it, but this doesn't seem compatible with your ideas.

Yeah I don't like that whole area of the brain thing. I just don't buy it. If there's one theme to what I've learned as a cognitive science major, it that the brain is much much more complicated than that.

This doesn't seem the case for me. It seems its more about how much of the process is internal versus external. It seems that Judging not only judges information, but uses that information to build with, either internally or externally. Essentially, they build what they see, in a kinda "monkey see, monkey do" process. So Ti builds a model of the universe in my head according to what Perceiving gathers. Te does the same thing, except it does it in the external world. Your definitions don't include what drives one to actually do anything, only how the information is gathered and assessed.

Judging can change models in that it can throw out something or validate it. But it can't come up with something novel.

Hmm, at what point does instinct start and cognitive functions begin? This assumes that Judging functions work slowly. But I could see this as maybe being true. I suppose either explanation works (Judging being fast, Perceiving being able to "judge", or a third explanation, its some other process entirely).

It's not fast/slow...it's conscious/unconscious. Also, instinct is in the realm of sensing, it's not outside of cognitive functions.

Hmm... I also seem to define Sensing slightly different. Sensing doesn't just give to Thinking and Feeling the information that a photon of light hit your retina, it interprets the photon of light, converts it into an image, and that gets passed on to Judging. iNtuition doesn't do this though. That's why Ns are prone to "space cadet-ness".

You're right. It does process the information. I shouldn't have left that out. Visual information hits the retinas, but it's still sensing until the time it's a three dimensional representation. Same with all senses. Once metaphor and analogy step in, though, it's intuition.

Could you elaborate on this?

I just doubt anyone actually thinks true/false more than "this is important"/"this is not important". Feeling narrows down the possible things you have to think about. If Feeling didn't reign over thinking, we'd be wasting a shitload of time.

Also, since you didn't address this, why does it happen that an introverted perceiving seems to get paired with an extroverted judging, and vice versa?

I don't think they're paired in actuality. I just think they're useful to talk about together because any good idea has to have an extroverted counterpart and introverted counterpart, as well as a perceiving and a judging counterpart.
 
Top