User Tag List

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Type and Reductionism: Is It Time to Move Away From the Eight-Functions Model?

  1. #11
    Administrator Array highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    6w5 sx/sp
    ILI Ni


    Quote Originally Posted by Andy View Post
    That's true, but I was thinking of something a little different. What I ment was that introverted judging functions are ways of assessing the worth of something, extroverted judging functions assess utility, introverted perceiving processes create a drive to try and understand why we do things and extroverted percieving process create an urge towards spontaneous experimentation and exploration.
    The groupings make complete sense. Lately I've been thinking that Si/Ni and Fe/Te have a lot in common for example.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  2. #12
    Senior Member Array htb's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007


    I recently read a persuasive categorical list of the eight functions on Wikipedia's Socionics page, of all places. The descriptions were devoid of overly figurative language and stereotypical phrases that have cropped up over the years.

    I see enough discrete behavior/cognition in daily life to intuit something like the eight functions. Until a better system can be devised, this one will satisfy my needs.

  3. #13
    Filthy Apes! Array Kalach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008


    Quote Originally Posted by Kalach View Post
    The Se and Si roles are also recursive, that is, they feed back on each other and continually modify each other’s “Sensing” (Figure 3). For example, if I want to find my dog AIBO, my Si knowledge and memory of AIBO influence what my Se is most likely to perceive—and the blind spots created—while searching the environment. When I perceive AIBO, the Gestalt (context), which includes any emotion (happy, sad, frustrated, etc.) that becomes attached to the act of perceiving him, modifies the “AIBO” in my Si database and will influence the perceiving process the next time I search for him. This creates a Ying and Yang effect (Thompson, 1999). Se and Si can be thought of allegorically as opposite sides of the same coin (Sensing) and totally interdependent. If Se is working (which Jung [1968] said it is constantly, unless you are in a coma), so is Si. Se and Si make up a subsystem within the Type perceiving system.

    I'm just going to say bullshit, because the process being described doesn't include some adequate distinguishing line between mere biological operation and such biological operation as should be called cognition. In other words, it seems like one should say the terms "Se" and "Si" are being used inappropriately here.
    On the other hand, if that distinguishing line is drawn too high up, perhaps the unconscious gets defined as non-cognition.

    Was Thomson saying that where Se is one of the potentially conscious functions--that is, when it's one of what current type theory places in one of your top four positions--one operating condition is that there be unconscious Si operations supporting it? (Or is it worse than that, and for any function both the i and the e version are equally available, all other things being equal?)
    Bellison uncorked a flood of horrible profanity, which, translated, meant, "This is extremely unusual."

    Boy meets Grr

  4. #14


    To me, the functions themselves are pretty comprehensive categorizations by definition. Basically, the thing that Jennifer said.

    I have no freakin' clue as to how the functions should be organized in a particular type. I'd be alright with a simpler model that tries to explain less, something along the lines of the OP and Jack Flack's efforts.

    We'd do well to just admit that things get much more fuzzy as we try to explain what role the more 'repressed' or 'inferior' functions have in a particular type, that we can't take for granted what the orientation of the 'fuzzier' functions are.

Similar Threads

  1. When is it time to move on from MBTI?
    By Octarine in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: 04-13-2016, 11:44 PM
  2. Replies: 36
    Last Post: 10-18-2013, 02:24 AM
  3. [NT] Time to move out? Is it time to give up?
    By sowhatnow in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-17-2012, 01:38 PM
  4. Thundercats Are On the Move...To Type Themselves
    By Turtledove in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-29-2012, 12:37 PM
  5. Type and Reductionism: Is It Time to Move Away From the Eight-Functions Model?
    By highlander in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-21-2011, 08:48 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