# Thread: Any function more of less useful than others?

1. Originally Posted by Aleksei
On the fly analysis and improvisation is Ne. Se is detail awareness.
Maybe you need to better develop your Ti...

2. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
Any function is haphazard when used haphazardly.

When used properly in conjunction with Te, this is much less the case.
Why Te?

Originally Posted by Zarathustra
The same could be said of any of the functions:

Is each particular function necessary for the particular act it is more likely to create? No.

Does the presence of that function increase the likelihood that that particular will take place? Yes.
I disagree. If you took away Se, you have a totally useless person. You take away Ti, you have a totally useless person. There is not sufficient way for any other process to take up the role of those processes. Presumably, this is just as true of Ni as it is of any of the other seven processes, but I don't think for the reason that you posted here. I was wandering more down the path of thought that I had written on your wall in regards to the absolutely necessary function of Ni.

Originally Posted by Aleksei
On the fly analysis and improvisation is Ne. Se is detail awareness.
Neither. Neither Ne nor Se encompasses that much. You're probably looking at more than one process there.

3. Originally Posted by Aleksei
The box. Learn not to trust it.

Consider the following:

1) The dominant function is the function we use to absorb process information. The auxiliary function is used to organize and communicate said information.

2) Te is the boss function. It emphasizes efficiency and is rather brash about it, and is good at scheduling, organizing, etc. It sounds something like this:

3) Ni, on the other hand, is the strategist function. It solves paradoxes, analyzes possible variables and creates predictions and grand schemes. It sounds something like this:

Although, of course, that's Ni assisted by Fe. Te Ni would sound more like this:

This of course is not how ENTJs function. They don't spot inefficiency and then air it out in a dreamy tone. They come up with grand strategies and then bark at other people to get them done. The problem is that according to Jung's definition of ENTJ, this is how they work. Conclusion: Jung was an idiot, and a better cognitive function theory is needed.
I don't even......

Wtf is this....

Perhaps you should start again over here...Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Originally Posted by Zarathustra
Exactly.

You're a Je dom.

You would.
Oh.. it requires Je dominance to realize that this thread is asking for everyone's individual interpretation and not some sort of objective truth.. thats interesting.

4. Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
Why Te?

Egocentrism.

See edit. I actually made it before you posted.

Also, I'm kinda assuming we're talking about the functions being in the dominant position.

Not that that's the only place for a function to manifest itself in an important way, but, well, you'd think those would be the two most important cases, and the ones we should consider first...

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
I disagree. If you took away Se, you have a totally useless person. You take away Ti, you have a totally useless person. There is not sufficient way for any other process to take up the role of those processes. Presumably, this is just as true of Ni as it is of any of the other seven processes, but I don't think for the reason that you posted here. I was wandering more down the path of thought that I had written on your wall in regards to the absolutely necessary function of Ni.
First off: wasn't the question more about the usefulness to society of a particular function, and what would happen to society without one of the functions?

In that case, I think you ought to go and reread my post (I've edited it slightly since, as I'd apparently mistakenly excluded the word "act").

But to deal with your approach anyway:

I disagree.

Why would taking away Se make someone a totally useless person? Same for Ti?

You obviously would have to replace it with something else (probably Ne and Fi, respectively, assuming we're talking about the functions being in the dominant position, and we want to keep the other functions relatively similar).

Why wouldn't that something else allow the person to perform just fine?

Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan
Neither. Neither Ne nor Se encompasses that much. You're probably looking at more than one process there.
Very much agreed.

5. Originally Posted by JustHer
I don't even......

Wtf is this....

Perhaps you should start again over here...Myers-Briggs Type Indicator - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh.. it requires Je dominance to realize that this thread is asking for everyone's individual interpretation and not some sort of objective truth.. thats interesting.

That's all I wanted. I mean all this iNtuition running around here and people getting stuck on the details!

6. Originally Posted by JustHer
Oh.. it requires Je dominance to realize that this thread is asking for everyone's individual interpretation and not some sort of objective truth.. thats interesting.
Yeah, sorry about that.

I realized after I wrote it what you actually meant.

I originally thought you were talking about "usefulness in a Je sense".

It was my bad, but, for some reason, I decided not to edit it out...

Maybe just to show the world (i.e., typeC) that I do make mistakes and I admit to them.

7. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
Any function is haphazard when used haphazardly.

When used properly in conjunction with Te or Fe, this is much less the case.

This is true in some sense. All introverted functions, particularly introverted judging functions, are extremely unilateral. So it's generally advised to exercise some extroverted function as a means of balancing them out.

It's very easy to seize one function and label it as "least useful" when your orientation is completely opposed to that function. For instance, we see Justerher saying that Fi is useless, but in her case, Fi is completely subservient to Te - therefore it is her most dreaded function to grapple with.

Meanwhile, Te is completely subservient to my Fi, which gives me a clear advantage when dealing with introspecting and feeling (which is a necessary component for society. Both Fi and Ti are needed in order to critically think about ethics and truth) However, we need others to keep treading onward to be more industrious or outwardly social (Te and Fe respectively).

Am I the only one who views society as functionally parallel to the individual human psyche, though much more balanced?

8. Originally Posted by Tater Typhoon
Am I the only one who views society as functionally parallel to the individual human psyche, though much more balanced?
You and Socrates, my friend.

You and Socrates.

9. ^^ I would be with you too, except that I think the degree of balance depends upon the individual and the society.

10. Originally Posted by Zarathustra
First off: wasn't the question more about the usefulness to society of a particular function, and what would happen to society without one of the functions?
I'm working on the premise that if something made invidiuals dysfunctional, then a society full of these dysfuncitonal individuals is in trouble.

Originally Posted by Zarathustra
But to deal with your approach anyway:

I disagree.

Why would taking away Se make someone a totally useless person? Same for Ti?

You obviously would have to replace it with something else (probably Ne and Fi, respectively, assuming we're talking about the functions being in the dominant position, and we want to keep the other functions relatively similar).

Why wouldn't that something else allow the person to perform just fine?
I'll focus on Se. Without Se you lack a basic capicity to react to external concrete details/stimulus/information what-have-you. Without that, what can you? I hate to answer a question with a question, but how would Ne take over for Se?

Each one of the processes is defined by a unique function. Unique being the key word. The other processes can't fill in. And it's worth noting that I don't even think the processes exist as any kind of tangible entity. At best they are different magnitudes of electrical activity in different areas that we choose to categorize down certain lines. They are merely concepts, so it's almost impossible for Ne to fill-in for Se just by virtue of the fact that anything acting in the role of Se wouldn't be Ne or Fi or whatever, it would be Se. A cognitive process is not like a cell in the brain that does a job and is prepared to take over for one of the others if they should die.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•