Cognitive function order and test results

[Giggly]

I've always wanted to ask this.

How come when you look up the theoretical cognitive functions for any type, it has a certain ordering to it, but when you take the cognitive function test, you may not get that same order, even though some of them (specifcally dom and aux) will be in that order, yet instead of going by a persons individual test results which are almost always outside of the theoretical ordering, we always go by what the theoretical ordering is?

Gosh I hope that made sense

I guess what I'm wondering is, why do they even have theoretical ordering beyond dom and aux anyway?

 

[Seymour]

Good Lord! That re-opens a whole can of worms. Possibilities include:

• The tests are flawed, and therefore aren't measuring what they claim to measure. This can include tests confusing skills with preference or development.
• One's self-perceptions are inaccurate, so results are inaccurate. (Especially true if one believes less developed functions are at least partially unconscious.)
• People vary, so perhaps the test results are accurate, but people are quirky. (Arguments can be made about whether quirky results indicate "unhealthy development" or something else.)
• Type dynamics are bunk (that is, the model is wrong).

Plus there's the whole issue of competing models, some of which explicitly claim NOT to say anything about function strength, per se.

Also, keep in mind that there hasn't been much empirical for type dynamics (although recently someone has claimed to have found some, but hasn't released his results yet).

I agree that the dom and aux functions are really central, and beyond that it seems things are less useful and require more exceptions (and/or require formulations like "Fe + Ni emulates Fi" and the like). Still, the type dynamic models are fun and flavorful. Plus, I've found the cognitive functions themselves useful for being more aware of my own relational blind spots.

 

[lunalum]

The theoretical ordering is about the role each of the functions play in yourself. The test results are a rough approximation of this based on your perceptions of their strength.

So there will tend to be a pattern in the results where it goes (primary function), (secondary function), ... ,(tertiary), ... , (inferior) because we tend to see our primary and secondary the most and prefer it the most, the tertiary as sort of a hit-and-miss, and the inferior as "aaah get it away!" (until a certain level of maturity is reached). And the functions on the other side of this being all over the place because of them being less conscious (or something like that).

 

[rav3n]

I recall taking a CF test written by a Ne-dom. Through at least 1/4 of the questions, it took me awhile to figure out what he was asking. In the end, I decided to interpret these questions as meaning "x". The output to this test ended up being about as far off my type as you can get.

Ne as primary = my blindspot.

 

[Thunderbringer]

I'm not a fan of how the cognitive functions are stacked. There's just something about the rigidity of it all that I don't believe in. As an INFP, I do use Fi more than my other functions, but I definitely don't use Ne more than I do Si. If I had to order my functions in the order I use them, it'd be:

Fi > Si > Ti > Ne > Se > Fe > Te > Ni

 

[INTP]

I'm not a fan of how the cognitive functions are stacked. There's just something about the rigidity of it all that I don't believe in. As an INFP, I do use Fi more than my other functions, but I definitely don't use Ne more than I do Si. If I had to order my functions in the order I use them, it'd be:

Fi > Si > Ti > Ne > Se > Fe > Te > Ni

function ordering isnt about how much you use them. the idea on dom and inferior ordering is that opposite of what dominates is repressed and works mainly unconscious. dom/aux idea is that the aux supports the dominant, so they sort of link together, for INFP its Ne feeding info for Fi and supporting it. if those two functions were both same orientation, it would cause you to go into some sort of introverted loop(Ji feeds info for Pi normally, but if you feed info to Pi with Ji and also perceive from Pi to feed Ji, it would drive you crazy, since your Pe would be rather unconscious(in 3rd or 4th place)). and tert works the same way with inferior than dom and aux work together. since you got P thing going on in conscious(dom/aux), the opposite J thing is working in the unconscious(tert/inferior). also since inferior is repressed to unconscious(in shadow in jungian terms) since it goes against ego, you need something in between to sort of reconcile the conflict between dom and inferior.

you should think it like this sort of loop:

Pe feeds Ji, Ji feeds Pi, Pi guides Je and Je guides Pe, then Pe feeds Ji and it goes around and around.

also one of the most important things to understand about all of this is that introversion is basically taking away unnecessary info from external world and only taking in what seems relevant, so you introvert from extraverted function when its about P working with J(INTJ sees loads of facts with Te, out of which he takes in with Ni only what seems to be relevant for the big picture, what is irrelevant, Ni disregards. INTP sees possibilities in external world via Ne and uses Ti to cut off the irrelevant). Ji and Je(or Pi and Pe) conflict if there isnt anything between them to sort shit out, how ever conflict is much smaller between aux and tert since there isnt so much repression going on and neither is too big on the ego, the conflict happens between ego and shadow(jungian unconscious, not 8 function theory bullshit shadow). extraversion is the opposite, putting an meaning to external world from inside. external world wouldnt make any sense if you wouldnt put a meaning to it from inside, it would be like putting a camera on computer, but no program to process what is it that the camera is showing to the computer.

that 8 function theory is just silly, cba to go into that right now, but the 8th function for example is what happens when dom and inferior conflict, jung calls this sort of "dialogue" between ego and unconscious a transcendent function and from this conflict comes out the reconciling third to solve the conflict and give you new way of looking at things. in INTP this conflict between dom and inferior looks like Fi(which according to that 8 function theory is INTPs 8th function), because its conscious Ti introverting from Fe thats working unconsciously. but thats whole different story.

oh and the thing you should understand about this ego(what you are conscious of) and shadow(what you are unconscious of, but has an effect on you), is that shadow shows itself as instincts and projections, so you can come conscious of what it says and its effects on you, but if you understand what it really means, you need to pay really close attention to it and develop something in between.

 

[Such Irony]

Good Lord! That re-opens a whole can of worms. Possibilities include:

• The tests are flawed, and therefore aren't measuring what they claim to measure. This can include tests confusing skills with preference or development.
• One's self-perceptions are inaccurate, so results are inaccurate. (Especially true if one believes less developed functions are at least partially unconscious.)
• People vary, so perhaps the test results are accurate, but people are quirky. (Arguments can be made about whether quirky results indicate "unhealthy development" or something else.)
• Type dynamics are bunk (that is, the model is wrong).

Plus there's the whole issue of competing models, some of which explicitly claim NOT to say anything about function strength, per se.

Also, keep in mind that there hasn't been much empirical for type dynamics (although recently someone has claimed to have found some, but hasn't released his results yet).

I agree that the dom and aux functions are really central, and beyond that it seems things are less useful and require more exceptions (and/or require formulations like "Fe + Ni emulates Fi" and the like). Still, the type dynamic models are fun and flavorful. Plus, I've found the cognitive functions themselves useful for being more aware of my own relational blind spots.

+1000

 

[Giggly]

Yeah I liked what [MENTION=8074]Seymour[/MENTION] had to say too.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

They're archetypal in nature, which means they are an ideal version of reality. They will not always match reality because of that.

 

[sciski]

There's a theory that says your function order is more about the way you use the functions, than how much you use them. Eg. Your dominant is the one you use to benefit yourself, your secondary is the one you use to benefit/parent others, your third is for relief, etc..

In other words, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd functions are qualitative descriptions, not quantitative ones. It'd be better to think of them as function A, function B, etc.

 

[Giggly]

There's a theory that says your function order is more about the way you use the functions, than how much you use them. Eg. Your dominant is the one you use to benefit yourself, your secondary is the one you use to benefit/parent others, your third is for relief, etc..

In other words, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd functions are qualitative descriptions, not quantitative ones. It'd be better to think of them as function A, function B, etc.

Interesting. what does relief mean?

 

[King sns]

There's a theory that says your function order is more about the way you use the functions, than how much you use them. Eg. Your dominant is the one you use to benefit yourself, your secondary is the one you use to benefit/parent others, your third is for relief, etc..

In other words, the 1st, 2nd, 3rd functions are qualitative descriptions, not quantitative ones. It'd be better to think of them as function A, function B, etc.

Huh. I like that, that makes a lot more sense to me.

 

[sciski]

Interesting. what does relief mean?

I think relief from stress... so an ESxJ might come up with random possibilities under stress (Ne), an IxFJ may get very logical and clinical under stress (Ti). That sort of thing.

 

[Giggly]

I think relief from stress... so an ESxJ might come up with random possibilities under stress (Ne), an IxFJ may get very logical and clinical under stress (Ti). That sort of thing.

Ahh, thanks.

 

[INTP]

I think relief from stress... so an ESxJ might come up with random possibilities under stress (Ne), an IxFJ may get very logical and clinical under stress (Ti). That sort of thing.

relief from dom/inferior loop type of thing that causes distress since they conflict. or actually inferior tries to tell you something from unconscious, but ego fights against it since they are opposites and its hard for ego to hold in two opposites that conflict. read my post in previous page

 

[Mal12345]

As someone pointed out, the function order for your type is an ideal. A tertiary loop can cause the third function in that order to appear stronger than the second. But this might not show up on tests either.

I think the problem is with the cognitive preference tests. Of course the test taker might be the problem. But if there is something wrong with the test itself, then that won't make a difference. It's necessary to consider what the tests are testing for. Does it test for the auxiliary type? Is the auxiliary of your type simply the one you prefer second most to the dominant? Is a tertiary, by definition, simply the function you prefer next after that?

The cognitive function tests oversimplify matters greatly. An auxiliary does not perform the same function as a dominant. Yet every question on a functions test asks about dominant traits, not auxiliaries, not tertiaries, etc. The test result then assumes that your second highest score is your auxiliary function for your type, depending on whether that is an irrational or rational function.

For example, someone scores: Ne, Se, Ti, Fi, in order of preference from highest to lowest (I'll omit the other four functions). The test algorithm then throws out Se because NeSe does not fit any MBTI type, and goes with NeTi (Ne, Se, Ti, Fi). The test then generates ENTP as a someone's result.

When I first took one of those tests I thought it drew a really accurate portrait of function order. Nowadays I see that it is purely oriented on testing for Dominants. And even the result it generates might be bogus because of all the false assumptions these tests are based upon. It assumes that NeTi = ENTP, and this is mistaken. Furthermore, since an auxiliary and tertiary, as pointed out by others in this thread, perform different kinds of functions for the psyche, they literally don't even test for those. The test just bases its result on some huge assumption about preference order.