User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8

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

    Default Cognitive Dysfunctions?

    I have found that lately it's been necessary for me to think of cognitive 'functions' only as cognitive 'types,' meaning that they are defined by an overall character or style of the person, and the sorts of things that bring them energy vs. the things they simply don't acknowledge as much because in the end it just doesn't have that certain energy boost.

    Problem is, I've picked up from the people here that the cognitive function model as things that actually function in them actually fits them. So perhaps cognitive types and cognitive functions can go together after all.

    But then why is it that certain things that certain things that are part of my cognitive type don't appear to function in me?

    And what keeps occuring to me is that to have cognitive functions that one has to be cognitively functional in the first place.

    What happens when a Ne type doesn't have the mental energy to summon tons of possibilities?

    Or a Ti type cannot focus enough to work out the miniscule inconsistencies?

    Or a Fe type who loses track of social nuances?

    Or an Si type cannot remember the standards?

    Or an Ni type that can't quite reach that moment of convergence?

    Or a Te type who is constantly forgetting which step goes next?

    Or a Fi type who cannot quite grasp how they feel?

    Or an Se type whose ability to create that immediate impact is lacking?


    Does it make sense to call someone an Se user because they are attentive to the environment and its details but blank in thought most of the time rather than able to think of 50 fanciful things at once, even if such person is a Ne type because of a preference/energy boost from such fanciful things at the rare times it happens and wanting the environment and current details of reality to just leave them alone? Is this person really classified best as an xSxP?

    Seems pretty ridiculous, especially since it makes this seem like Se is a sort of lack of cognitive process, but then I hear on the forum a lot of the time from xNxPs being unaware of their surroundings and being able to think of tons of things at once, and even associate it with 'mental quickness'. But can these things really have to do with type if there is a certain cognitive dysfunction at work where the person is involuntarily blank for long periods of time?

    Consequence: when I take the quizzes about how much I 'use' a certain process, I can't answer that part at all, particularly with Ne and Ti. I still strongly relate to them somehow, but usage? And then of course when I hear of people on here constantly associating the type with thinking of so many things and so quickly, and so deeply, it's kind of disorienting.

    But then I still get some sense of relation in what remains of my thoughts that is still a sort of dysfunction, like how it is almost impossible for me to keep this topic on the same thing that I had in mind when I started out typing it My hands and mind are far too lazy to actually describe 95% of what comes to me on this topic. The topic just keeps coming back and I wonder if it's valid for me to stick to the cognitive type technique to not get so wrapped up in the messy reality of cognitive capacities. Or perhaps find a way to assess type by patterns only in their dysfunction?

    Can preference and function really be fully united?

  2. #2
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    I have found that lately it's been necessary for me to think of cognitive 'functions' only as cognitive 'types,' meaning that they are defined by an overall character or style of the person, and the sorts of things that bring them energy vs. the things they simply don't acknowledge as much because in the end it just doesn't have that certain energy boost.

    Problem is, I've picked up from the people here that the cognitive function model as things that actually function in them actually fits them. So perhaps cognitive types and cognitive functions can go together after all.

    But then why is it that certain things that certain things that are part of my cognitive type don't appear to function in me?

    And what keeps occuring to me is that to have cognitive functions that one has to be cognitively functional in the first place.

    What happens when a Ne type doesn't have the mental energy to summon tons of possibilities?

    Or a Ti type cannot focus enough to work out the miniscule inconsistencies?

    Or a Fe type who loses track of social nuances?

    Or an Si type cannot remember the standards?

    Or an Ni type that can't quite reach that moment of convergence?

    Or a Te type who is constantly forgetting which step goes next?

    Or a Fi type who cannot quite grasp how they feel?

    Or an Se type whose ability to create that immediate impact is lacking?


    Does it make sense to call someone an Se user because they are attentive to the environment and its details but blank in thought most of the time rather than able to think of 50 fanciful things at once, even if such person is a Ne type because of a preference/energy boost from such fanciful things at the rare times it happens and wanting the environment and current details of reality to just leave them alone? Is this person really classified best as an xSxP?

    Seems pretty ridiculous, especially since it makes this seem like Se is a sort of lack of cognitive process, but then I hear on the forum a lot of the time from xNxPs being unaware of their surroundings and being able to think of tons of things at once, and even associate it with 'mental quickness'. But can these things really have to do with type if there is a certain cognitive dysfunction at work where the person is involuntarily blank for long periods of time?

    Consequence: when I take the quizzes about how much I 'use' a certain process, I can't answer that part at all, particularly with Ne and Ti. I still strongly relate to them somehow, but usage? And then of course when I hear of people on here constantly associating the type with thinking of so many things and so quickly, and so deeply, it's kind of disorienting.

    But then I still get some sense of relation in what remains of my thoughts that is still a sort of dysfunction, like how it is almost impossible for me to keep this topic on the same thing that I had in mind when I started out typing it My hands and mind are far too lazy to actually describe 95% of what comes to me on this topic. The topic just keeps coming back and I wonder if it's valid for me to stick to the cognitive type technique to not get so wrapped up in the messy reality of cognitive capacities. Or perhaps find a way to assess type by patterns only in their dysfunction?

    Can preference and function really be fully united?
    You sound like you are stuck in an Si-Ni/Ti loop? I say Si more so because you seem caught up in trying to make it fit some preconceived notion of a theory instead of trying to explore how people use functions and why.

    Do you demand much of yourself? Because you seem caught up in knowing this perfectly, and I don't think that's possible, which is why I eschew function line-ups beyond, say, 3 preferred functions. If you are well-rounded, perhaps you have many functions you use well! I don't think of the dominant as always needing to be 'on call.' It's just usually preferred...I think of it as the gatekeeper function (which is controversial with dom irrational function theory). Sometimes I don't choose to go through the gate though, and I do something different or lazy or crazy.

    Your post sounds pretty Ne to me, esp at the end. And as for the bolded, I think that's what proponents of 'shadow function' theory support.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  3. #3
    From the Undertow CuriousFeeling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INfJ
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    EII
    Posts
    3,456

    Default

    Can't reach the moment of convergence... hmmmm I've had this quite a few times when a puzzle or problem baffles me to the point I can't see the forest for the trees. Getting so focused on minute details because I think each section of the system at play are important, but it's a matter of breaking it down. Perhaps the best instance I can think up of is when I was taking organic chemistry.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

    Johari/Nohari

    “Thoughts are the shadows of our feelings -- always darker, emptier and simpler.”
    ― Friedrich Nietzsche




  4. #4
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    You sound like you are stuck in an Si-Ni/Ti loop? I say Si more so because you seem caught up in trying to make it fit some preconceived notion of a theory instead of trying to explore how people use functions and why.
    Yeah I think you're right about that. But I see it more like parental Ti is on my shoulder shooting me with a squirt gun when I come across this sort of inconsistency between type and function, and Si is by my feet threatening to stomp on my toes if I don't read the classics and at least try to play along with their theories before smashing them with a hammer. And Fe says that getting all reclusive like this is not good for my health

    It was exploring how people say they use functions and seeing glitches in my own usage that prompted me to ask the audience in the first place.

    Why people use certain functions? I have my own theories on that but that's for another thread

    Do you demand much of yourself? Because you seem caught up in knowing this perfectly, and I don't think that's possible
    I just want to understand it... I don't need perfect knowledge but I want to find out from others if they have similar confusion and/or dysfunction and at least not be alone in it if I can't solve it

    I demand that I'm awesomely good at stuff, and take over the world. You know, standard NTness...

    Your post sounds pretty Ne to me, esp at the end.
    Sounds. That's kind of part of my point. That perhaps typing could be done purely on the basis of an overall character/style. I think it's that overall type that the "sounds" and "seems" and 'looks like" come from. It's a little less measurable than thinking of these things as functions, but I bet you and/or someone very experienced with this stuff could at least point out some specific traits of my posts that make it "sound pretty Ne"

    And if we can do that, then what's up with making these things have to be functions (things that depend on measurable usage) too?

    I think that's what proponents of 'shadow function' theory support.
    Which shadow function theory? Isn't there two of them?

  5. #5
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    Yeah I think you're right about that. But I see it more like parental Ti is on my shoulder shooting me with a squirt gun when I come across this sort of inconsistency between type and function, and Si is by my feet threatening to stomp on my toes if I don't read the classics and at least try to play along with their theories before smashing them with a hammer. And Fe says that getting all reclusive like this is not good for my health

    It was exploring how people say they use functions and seeing glitches in my own usage that prompted me to ask the audience in the first place.

    Why people use certain functions? I have my own theories on that but that's for another thread



    I just want to understand it... I don't need perfect knowledge but I want to find out from others if they have similar confusion and/or dysfunction and at least not be alone in it if I can't solve it

    I demand that I'm awesomely good at stuff, and take over the world. You know, standard NTness...



    Sounds. That's kind of part of my point. That perhaps typing could be done purely on the basis of an overall character/style. I think it's that overall type that the "sounds" and "seems" and 'looks like" come from. It's a little less measurable than thinking of these things as functions, but I bet you and/or someone very experienced with this stuff could at least point out some specific traits of my posts that make it "sound pretty Ne"

    And if we can do that, then what's up with making these things have to be functions (things that depend on measurable usage) too?



    Which shadow function theory? Isn't there two of them?
    I'm not very experienced. I just dig it and have my own theories about it. I'm good at judging, not really creating when it comes to type. Like I don't go around typing everyone I see (tho it does cross my mind perhaps, one or two preferences they seem to have). But Jung was a pretty cool cat and he observed people all the time. Lots of people. Then Katharine Briggs came along and added to it (after developing her own personality theory, but choosing Jung's because it was better).

    Then there is enneagram. And this, I believe, tells one the ego state of where one prefers to hang around at, when healthy and when unhealthy. So, to me that covers environment affect on personality. Is there something else we can add that we haven't discovered yet?

    I don't know why I see Ne in your post...I think because there are the origins of lots of ideas of "why," then those sort of branch out........Then when you try to ponder them, that becomes Ni...and Si.?
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  6. #6
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    @LunaLuminosity: you seem really bouncy and random from the few times we've interacted (real time, vent). It always takes me awhile come up w/ something "witty" but you come up with it in a snap. I say that's the closest thing to Ne as one can get.

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

    Default

    @Glycerine: so this means you are with me in shattering cognitive function theory as we currently know it, right?

  8. #8
    Glycerine
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LunaLuminosity View Post
    @Glycerine: so this means you are with me in shattering cognitive function theory as we currently know it, right?
    yes..... the when an extrovert goes into an introverted loop, it's sometimes equates to masturbation of the mind (or that's how I see it).

Similar Threads

  1. The Evolution of Human Cognition, Artificial Intelligence, Supervenience
    By ferunandesu in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-16-2012, 09:46 AM
  2. MBTI and Cognitive Functions
    By RansomedbyFire in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 09-10-2007, 06:52 AM
  3. Design Your Own Cognitive Process Character
    By ygolo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-09-2007, 12:55 AM
  4. [JCF] Leanor Thomson's Theory and INFP cognitive functions
    By heart in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-31-2007, 01:07 AM
  5. Cognitive Functions Test?
    By MerkW in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-23-2007, 04:01 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