User Tag List

12 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 16

  1. #1
    No moss growing on me Giggly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    iSFj
    Enneagram
    2 sx/so
    Posts
    9,666

    Default Cognitive function order and test results

    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?

  2. #2
    Vaguely Precise Seymour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/so
    Posts
    1,565

    Default

    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.

  3. #3
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    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).

  4. #4
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,024

    Default

    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.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Thunderbringer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    276

    Default

    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
    We cast away priceless time in dreams, born of imagination, fed upon illusion, and put to death by reality. - Judy Garland

  6. #6
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thunderbringer View Post
    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.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #7
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Seymour View Post
    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
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  8. #8
    No moss growing on me Giggly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    iSFj
    Enneagram
    2 sx/so
    Posts
    9,666

    Default

    Yeah I liked what @Seymour had to say too.

  9. #9
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

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

  10. #10
    Senior Member sciski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    NSFW
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    468

    Default

    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.

Similar Threads

  1. Cognitive functions in use test?
    By Jacobman77 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-04-2015, 10:20 AM
  2. Trouble understanding Cognitive Functions ordering and Typing
    By Yaru in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 12-12-2014, 07:46 AM
  3. MBTI function order and Thomson's Type Lasagna and Ship Analogies
    By asynartetic in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 04-04-2014, 03:27 PM
  4. [ENFP] ENFPs cognitive functions test results :)
    By mackie in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 09-01-2010, 01:59 PM
  5. How to determine function order and what the functions mean... AS A NINJA
    By BlackCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-13-2009, 07:59 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