User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 20

  1. #1
    Writing... Tamske's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    1,764

    Default Book about cognitive functions...

    This is a great idea of Wonkavision!

    He proposes to make a book about cognitive functions with illustrations. I want to take it on, but I need some help.

    I'm not a specialist on those functions. Everything I know about them comes from this forum. I've even never read a book about them. Who wants to describe the functions? Who wants to edit?

    I want to provide:

    - illustrations of the functions (I'm working on backgrounds for the judger functions now)
    - illustrations of 'character control rooms' - maybe without text, such that they are more clear?
    - illustrations like my avatar, with dominant and auxiliary function working together?
    - maybe some comics featuring the functions taking a decision (On paper, I've got a nice one where the ESTJ courthouse tackles the difficult question 'Do I love this man?')

    What I want from collaborators:
    - a DEADLINE!!! Just to force myself to keep working on it instead of beginning new things.
    - descriptions of the functions
    - general criticism and comments
    - maybe some text describing the 'function guys' (somewhat like: this is Si. He gets information from the archive (your memory) to the judging functions...)
    Got questions? Ask an ENTP!
    I'm female. I just can't draw women

  2. #2
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Get yourself Gary Hartzler's book: 'Functions of Type.'
    You can order it on Amazon.com.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    4
    Posts
    384

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tamske View Post
    This is a great idea of Wonkavision!

    He proposes to make a book about cognitive functions with illustrations. I want to take it on, but I need some help.

    I'm not a specialist on those functions. Everything I know about them comes from this forum. I've even never read a book about them. Who wants to describe the functions? Who wants to edit?

    I want to provide:

    - illustrations of the functions (I'm working on backgrounds for the judger functions now)
    - illustrations of 'character control rooms' - maybe without text, such that they are more clear?
    - illustrations like my avatar, with dominant and auxiliary function working together?
    - maybe some comics featuring the functions taking a decision (On paper, I've got a nice one where the ESTJ courthouse tackles the difficult question 'Do I love this man?')

    What I want from collaborators:
    - a DEADLINE!!! Just to force myself to keep working on it instead of beginning new things.
    - descriptions of the functions
    - general criticism and comments
    - maybe some text describing the 'function guys' (somewhat like: this is Si. He gets information from the archive (your memory) to the judging functions...)
    it's a very good idea! you need to find out as much about the individual functions by yourself for yourself and how they play out in the total typology of a person then ask others for input, imho. the illustrations you've drawn are inviting!

  4. #4
    Senior Member Heinel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LSI
    Posts
    337

    Default

    When you say cognitive functions, which system are you using? The function system of MBTI, I find, is inconsistent in some ways. For example, the ISTPs are said to primarily use Ti, supported by Se. However, if you look at the type descriptions, and closely observe or question the people who are typed as ISTP, you'll find that most of them actually do not care much about Ti at all (even though they can summon it when they must). Their motivations are, in fact, Si - Te.

    On an observational level I guess the difference is usually kept at a minimum. However, if your illustrations are meant to show the internal state of a person, I think it is necessary that you drop the link between the 4 letter label (and the type descriptions associated with it) with the cognitive functions themselves.
    Check out my blog: http://OrnateRitual.com

  5. #5
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heinel View Post
    When you say cognitive functions, which system are you using? The function system of MBTI, I find, is inconsistent in some ways. For example, the ISTPs are said to primarily use Ti, supported by Se. However, if you look at the type descriptions, and closely observe or question the people who are typed as ISTP, you'll find that most of them actually do not care much about Ti at all (even though they can summon it when they must). Their motivations are, in fact, Si - Te.
    This is dumb - you can't criticize a function system because a generalised type description is too vague. If the function attitudes seem vague or inconsistent, then the descriptions you're reading are vague or inconsistent. The functions differ from each other greatly, I can assure you.

    And if an ISTP relates more to Si + Te than Ti + Se, why aren't they just an ISTJ? How could you even possibly confuse or correlate the two, they result in completely different ways of processing and dealing with the world.
    Hello

  6. #6
    Senior Member Heinel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LSI
    Posts
    337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    This is dumb - you can't criticize a function system because of generalised type descriptions that are too vague. If the function attitudes seem vague or inconsistent, then the descriptions you're reading are vague or inconsistent. The functions differ from each other greatly, I can assure you.

    And if an ISTP relates more to Si + Te than Ti + Se, why aren't they just an ISTJ? How could you even possibly confuse those two, they result in hugely different behaviours.
    Because the description of the type itself (as well as the tests) fundamentally differs from what the functions stand for.
    Check out my blog: http://OrnateRitual.com

  7. #7
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heinel View Post
    Because the description of the type itself (as well as the tests) fundamentally differs from what the functions stand for.
    What descriptions are you reading? How do they differ? If the descriptions differ from the functions, shouldnt you disregard the description? How does one bad description reflect badly on the function system itself?
    Hello

  8. #8
    Senior Member Heinel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LSI
    Posts
    337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    What descriptions are you reading? How do they differ? If the descriptions differ from the functions, shouldnt you disregard the description? How does one bad description reflect badly on the function system itself?
    Type ISTP into google, all of the results in the first page more or less says the same thing. That is however not where I draw my conclusion. I draw my conclusion from the SP forum here.

    Most of the ISTP (in fact, all but one or two) currently active on this board are in fact SiTe, not TiSe as the theory describes. Their primary motivations come from sensory perceptions of the inner state. They enjoy creating a welcoming, relaxed atmosphere (Si) but are able of holding logical views and expedient action (Te). Most of them enjoy solitary, physical actions (again Si) and few of them would want anything to do with theories (not Ti). They are also not prone to aggressive tactics in arguments (not Se), unless Si is violated first, and that's a result of Te.

    I suppose you can disagree with my abductive analysis, but if you try it yourself you'll start to see more and more problems, and a lot of mistypes. Or rather, I should say, misuse of the functional labels. You start seeing people spewing crap like "I am Ti-dom with Se-aux, when I know I'm right I know I'm right, I don't care about why and I don't care about how that happened."
    Check out my blog: http://OrnateRitual.com

  9. #9
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Heinel View Post
    Type ISTP into google, all of the results in the first page more or less says the same thing. That is however not where I draw my conclusion. I draw my conclusion from the SP forum here.

    Most of the ISTP (in fact, all but one or two) currently active on this board are in fact SiTe, not TiSe as the theory describes.
    If they're not TiSe, they're not ISTP. The function order determines what type you are. If they're SiTe, they're ISTJ. That's how the system works.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heinel View Post
    I suppose you can disagree with my abductive analysis, but if you try it yourself you'll start to see more and more problems, and a lot of mistypes.
    Mistypes are a result of either test results being wrong, or a lack of understanding for the functions and how they determine type behaviour (either by being led astray by bad or vague descriptions, or simply not taking the time to really understand the system). That doesn't mean the function system itself is inconsistent, because it really isn't.
    Hello

  10. #10
    Senior Member Heinel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    LSI
    Posts
    337

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    If they're not TiSe, they're not ISTP.
    You tell them.


    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    The function order determines what type you are. If they're SiTe, they're ISTJ. That's how the system works. Mistypes are a result of either test results being wrong, or a lack of understanding for the functions and how they determine type behaviour (either by being led astray by bad or vague descriptions, or simply not taking the time to really understand the system). That doesn't mean the function system itself is inconsistent, because it really isn't.
    You just eliminated the part that is inconsistent. We're in agreement. However, that is not reality. As far as I can see most people here are using the wrong tag if you can have your way.
    Check out my blog: http://OrnateRitual.com

Similar Threads

  1. Confused about cognitive functions?
    By iceblink in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-06-2017, 09:41 AM
  2. about cognitive function
    By laymen in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-17-2016, 09:47 AM
  3. [JCF] The truth about cognitive functions
    By iHeartCats in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-21-2015, 05:46 PM
  4. Let's talk about cognitive functions (Se/Ne types)
    By Fay in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-25-2014, 08:33 PM
  5. Which term should replace "user" when talking about cognitive functions?
    By Such Irony in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-06-2011, 02:13 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