User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 34

  1. #11
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bri View Post
    Sooo... is it the order we go through those things that matters? Because all of them seem like plausible things I'd do/think on any given day. Is it the order, the one I do first, second, etc. most often, that determines type?
    Well Lenore thomson argues that we all have all 8 functions. I don't know much else, but will looka t buying the book.

    Regarding my doubts expressed, I agree with the quote, and still struggle to see why Te and Ti would negatively correlate with each other...from those descriptions at least, they seem complementary within any given XTXX personality, if anything.

    Which is not to say that they don't negate each other as functions, I can see how they do. However I would think a well rounded NT personality could switch easily between the two. Out of interest, to those who ahve read Thomson, does she say this, or the opposite?:s
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  2. #12
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Well, Thomson does lay out a particular assigned order of the processes. I will say that I break with pretty much all of the literature on the cognitive types in that I've been mostly unimpressed with the reasoning about the processes beyond the auxiliary, so as of now, I define types by the dominant and auxiliary procces (the primary pair) and assume that the other processes may fall in any particular arrangement, and differs among people of the same type.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  3. #13
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    So, I think Thomson makes a separation between functions ("function attitudes" in Beebe's terms) and skills (cognitive processes, more or less). (You can see this here).

    Function attitudes are the basic psychological orientation and the basis of how we consciously discriminate between things, and they are in service of the ego. Function attitudes also determine what things we get energy from. Function attitudes are habitual and bound up with our self-identity and the things we find enjoyable and important.

    Behavior skills (or cognitive processes) in Thomson's view are also available and can be used in service of our ego's aims. We can develop those skills to broaden the range of options consciously available to us (and the quality of those options), but they don't change our fundamental aims or how we evaluate things when push comes to shove.

    So when Thomson talks about our "left brain alternatives" or "right brain alternatives," for example, she is talking about things in terms of behavior skills (that is, cognitive processes used in such a way that they don't set our top-level priorities) and not so much in terms of function attitudes (which do).

    So, we can't just develop our inferior function attitude, because that would mean going directly against the aims of our ego. (And note that Thomson lists the inferior function as most unconscious/least developed, as the Hartzlers did based on collected data). That doesn't mean we can't develop Te-ish (even as an Fi-doms) behavior skills that back our primary aims, but that doesn't have much to do with our function attitudes. It doesn't mean we suddenly change all our priorities and values and become Te-doms, we just apply those skills in a limited domain.

    Note that Thomson's model is different than some, which claim that the primary, secondary, tertiary and inferior functions are all you get (in that order), both as function attitudes and behavior skills/cognitive processes.

  4. #14
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    Well Lenore thomson argues that we all have all 8 functions. I don't know much else, but will looka t buying the book.

    Regarding my doubts expressed, I agree with the quote, and still struggle to see why Te and Ti would negatively correlate with each other...from those descriptions at least, they seem complementary within any given XTXX personality, if anything.

    Which is not to say that they don't negate each other as functions, I can see how they do. However I would think a well rounded NT personality could switch easily between the two. Out of interest, to those who ahve read Thomson, does she say this, or the opposite?:s
    They're completely different functions, the only reason you're confusing them is because they're both labelled as "thinking" functions.

    Ti is about being "in tune" with how things work, simply for the sake of knowing. It's all about identifying and following "natural law", and seeking the absolute truth removed from arbitrary institutions and human-centric motives.

    Te is about exerting control over your environment to maximise goals and achievements - contingency planning, organisation, following procedure - everything that ensures a stable and trustworthy organization or institution for everyone to rely on.

    it's the difference between Albert Einstein and Bill Gates.
    Hello

  5. #15
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VagrantFarce View Post
    They're completely different functions, the only reason you're confusing them is because they're both labelled as "thinking" functions.

    Ti is about being "in tune" with how things work, simply for the sake of knowing. It's all about identifying and following "natural law", and seeking the absolute truth removed from arbitrary institutions and human-centric motives.

    Te is about exerting control over your environment to maximise goals and achievements - contingency planning, organisation, following procedure - everything that ensures a stable and trustworthy organization or institution for everyone to rely on.

    it's the difference between Albert Einstein and Bill Gates.
    I can see the difference there, but Einstein and Gates would represent extremes (I assume, Ia ctually know amazingly little about both of them). I don't dispute that Ti and Te are ocntradictory functions in the sense that one is essentially constructing models based on assumptions and one is deconstructing assumptions. However they just seem complementary more than exclusive withint he context of a given personality, I don't see why a well-rounded NT personality wouldn't employ both of these regularly and effectively.

    Also I don't see that it's as simple as them both being "simply" called thinking. Surely they are both manifestations of the same function, but differently oriented (one externally, one internally)? In fact wasn't the I/E addition only a later addition on the initially more crude T/F/N/S divisions?

    Having read some of the descriptions of them (for example on the widely circulated cognitive processes test) I would think there is a fair amount of overlap, for example, breaking down a system to see how it works, then presenting a causal chain of logic, block by block to explain how to construct a system, seem complementary, no? Or did I miss something?
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  6. #16
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    Regarding my doubts expressed, I agree with the quote, and still struggle to see why Te and Ti would negatively correlate with each other...from those descriptions at least, they seem complementary within any given XTXX personality, if anything.
    I think one of your issues is that you are viewing one as an applied version of the other... which means that one is really just an overlay on the other... but really, a Ti person using Te-style functionality is still thinking in Ti and applying it, she is not thinking in the base Te language as a foundation in itself, and I think this has ramifications that filter throughout the behavior. In addition, MBTI really is more about tandem functions (Ni+Te, Ti+Ne)... I'm not sure how easy it is to separate a judging function from its complementary perceiving function because with anything we do, generally, we have a perception and then a choice/behavior/judging action; functions do not exist within vacuums.

    I might just be confusing matters, so just get through the book if you can and then post some more questions or criticisms....
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  7. #17
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    It is really, really hard to explain how a process works by itself. They really are pieces so functionally codependent that they don't make much sense when isolated. I've taken more and more to thinking of there being 8 process pairs (or 16 if you're counting the mirrors) than 8 processes.

    I don't know why this idea keeps coming up that E is somehow more applicable, assertive, or projective than I. In the end, for all of the functions, E and I is really a distinction of source or point of orientation.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  8. #18
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    fair enough...I'll just read the book I guess.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  9. #19
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    My main thought is, Te and Ti are definitively not merely applied and unapplied versions of the same thing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    So, I think Thomson makes a separation between functions ("function attitudes" in Beebe's terms) and skills (cognitive processes, more or less). (You can see this here).
    Lenore's ideas helped me along, and the link is actually part of an e-mail discussion we had last year. Though she doesn't articulate it as explicitly there, what I learned was to look at an ego, that chooses its dominant orientation, and then uses its dominant function in that orientation. So there are four functions, and the ego uses them in particular orientations, and suppresses the opposite orientation. This is truer to Jung's original conception, where he spoke of "thinking introverts", for instance. Initially, the dominant function is in the dominant orientation, and all the others are rejected into the opposite orientation. This is why earlier on, they thought the aux., tertiary and inferior all had the same "attitude". It is the Puer complex (not function) that orients the tertiary into the dominant attitude (the "tertiary Temptation"). So then, you get the familiar alternating "attitude" order for the first four. The "shadows' are simply the suppressed opposite orientations.
    So then, there really are only four functions, and it's the ego that employs them differently, making the "attitudes" appear so different from each other.

    Some will argue that Jung later revised his model into a strict eight distinct "processes" with I/E meaning nothing more than "dominant function attitude". But his earlier conception seems to make it more understandable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    To tell you the truth, I bought the book. I admit I have not done a very thorough search, but up to now I am both surprised and regretful to say that I have not found her work comprehensively online.
    There's the Exegesis site:
    The Green Light Wiki (which is down at the moment).
    Last edited by Eric B; 01-29-2010 at 07:52 PM.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  10. #20
    Senior Member VagrantFarce's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,557

    Default

    The problem is that you're seeing the functions as tools in a toolbag, to be utilised when needed, when they're not - they're conceptual standpoints that seek to illustrate natural, instinctive behaviour. This isn't really your fault, it's Linda Berens' fault! Her and that stupid cognitive processes test have people convinced that they exist in vacuums unto themselves.

    A dominant-Te type is going to process and interact with the world in an entirely different manner than a dominant-Ti type. It's probably tough to see this because, like I say, you're looking at the functions as discrete tools that people just pick up and use, when they're supposed to be looked at as a whole - a set of interoperating variables that operate on certain rules, in order to illustrate the way people think, behave and react to the world.
    Hello

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Excellent Comparison of Introverted and Extraverted Jungian Cognitive Functions
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-26-2015, 06:26 AM
  2. INFP, ENFJ and ISTP views of the same situation
    By Ene in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-04-2014, 09:35 PM
  3. [JCF] Podcast Describing Difference Between Introverted and Extraverted Intuition
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-20-2014, 10:35 PM
  4. [INFP] INFP's and better use of the inferior function after a period of emotional pain.
    By Rosabel in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-04-2012, 07:42 PM
  5. Introverted and Extraverted Side
    By VagrantFarce in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-27-2010, 08:08 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