User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 59

  1. #1
    Senior Member Studmuffin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    171

    Default Does anyone else reject the cognitive functions?

    I'm just curious. Are there any other MBTI enthusiasts out there who think that the cognitive functions are malarkey? I reject them for several reasons

    1) Easily projected onto yourself and others

    2) No one can seem to agree on their definitions of them (I mean, unless you want to accept the "Fi-users are independent; stay true to their selves" "Fe-users are submissive; incapable of being their own person" set of definitions.)

    3) They're unobservable and subjective

    4) In spite of being a non-behaviorist attempt to understand personality, they're used and interpreted in a behavioristic way.

    5) They have no verifiable existence outside of Carl Jung's imagination (artificial constructs which he, Myers, and her followers read into the personalities of other people, much as Marx and his followers interpreted human history to support their philosophy)

    I just stick with the MBTI preferences. They're simple, straightforward, and more compatible with my common-sense and life experience
    Likes /DG/ liked this post

  2. #2
    Suave y Fuerte BadOctopus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    3,273

    Default

    Aren't cognitive functions part of MBTI?
    Likes Studmuffin23, Cygnus liked this post

  3. #3
    Senior Member Nicodemus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,133

    Default

    I prefer neuroscience to mysticism.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Studmuffin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BadOctopus View Post
    Aren't cognitive functions part of MBTI?
    Very good question. I was going to address that objection in the OP, but decided to stay on topic.

    The answer is both yes and no. While MBTI was inspired by Jungian typology, it places a stronger emphasis what is observable. Myers' distinction in "Gifts Differing" between judgers/perceivers and how they navigate the world is a great example.

    Considered by themselves, the MBTI preferences just represent common-sense truths about personality. Some people are reserved, others are outgoing; some people are structured, others are spontaneous; some people are concerned (feelers), others are objective (thinkers). You'd be hard-pressed to find someone who denies this.

    Keirsey, as much as I disagree with some of his ideas, proves my point. The surprising accuracies and insights of "Please Understand Me II" show that MBTI can be understood apart from the Jungian functions, if not even better.

    (I'm not a Keirseyan by any stretch of the imagination. But in comparison with other MBTI authors, I think he probably had the most accurate understanding of how it applies to real people.)

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    1,628

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BadOctopus View Post
    Aren't cognitive functions part of MBTI?
    Correction: all of MBTI.



    Typing by letters alone is the most dangerous mistake you could make. For example, you could easily mistake J/P for certain Reinin dichotomies such as Rational/Irrational, Judicious/Decisive, or Strategic/Tactical; confusions such as these can not only lead you to mistype yourself and others, but misattribute traits to types and functions to which they don't at all belong.
    Likes KarmaButterfly liked this post

  6. #6
    Senior Member Studmuffin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cygnus View Post
    Correction: all of MBTI.



    Typing by letters alone is the most dangerous mistake you could make. For example, you could easily mistake J/P for certain Reinin dichotomies such as Rational/Irrational, Judicious/Decisive, or Strategic/Tactical; confusions such as these can not only lead you to mistype yourself and others, but misattribute traits to types and functions to which they don't at all belong.
    My experience is the reverse of that.

    You're helping me make a good point here, however. Jungian typology and MBTI typology are not the same thing; they're incompatible systems. One focuses on how you prefer to navigate the world, and the other on how the world looks from your point of view (something impossible to observe or define).
    Likes /DG/ liked this post

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Studmuffin23 View Post
    1) Easily projected onto yourself and others
    Its not the fault of the theory, but someone who doesent understand it trying to use it.


    2) No one can seem to agree on their definitions of them (I mean, unless you want to accept the "Fi-users are independent; stay true to their selves" "Fe-users are submissive; incapable of being their own person" set of definitions.)
    Jung gave his definitions which are the "official" definitions, some people have tried to create their own definitions, but if they differ from jungs definitions, they are not jungian/mbti, but something else


    3) They're unobservable and subjective
    You can observe them in people, I agree that there should be more research done on them with brain scanners to verify them or to create more accurate definitions which can be measured with brain scanners.


    4) In spite of being a non-behaviorist attempt to understand personality, they're used and interpreted in a behavioristic way.
    Jung or MBTI doesent do this, but its obvious that certain ways of thinking leads to similar outcomes in behavior. I dont see whats the problem with this.


    5) They have no verifiable existence outside of Carl Jung's imagination (artificial constructs which he, Myers, and her followers read into the personalities of other people, much as Marx and his followers interpreted human history to support their philosophy)
    There havent been much research on them at all, because research is expensive and academia hates jung and MBTI and likes big 5.


    I just stick with the MBTI preferences. They're simple, straightforward, and more compatible with my common-sense and life experience
    You can do that, but you you only gain like 5% of total understanding about the subject.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read
    Likes KarmaButterfly liked this post

  8. #8
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Studmuffin23 View Post
    I'm just curious. Are there any other MBTI enthusiasts out there who think that the cognitive functions are malarkey? I reject them for several reasons

    2) No one can seem to agree on their definitions of them (I mean, unless you want to accept the "Fi-users are independent; stay true to their selves" "Fe-users are submissive; incapable of being their own person" set of definitions.)..
    What's the issue there, with picking an obviously pro-Fi/anti-Fe definition of JCF? I'd have issues with those types of descriptions as well, if some functions are promoted as "best of" and others are isolated in order to be disparaged.

    Do you think some of the functions get the shaft in JCF?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft
    Likes Hard liked this post

  9. #9
    Senior Member Studmuffin23's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9
    Posts
    171

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    What's the issue there, with picking an obviously pro-Fi/anti-Fe definition of JCF? I'd have issues with those types of descriptions as well, if some functions are promoted as "best of" and others are isolated in order to be disparaged.

    Do you think some of the functions get the shaft in JCF?
    Well, actually I was going to show how both Fe and Fi are misrepresented, but then I realized that someone would accuse me of misrepresenting function descriptions.

    The content of my quotes, quite surprisingly, can be found in most function descriptions regarding Fe and Fi (it's subtly stated, to be fair); even in Gifts Differing.

  10. #10
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Studmuffin23 View Post
    Well, actually I was going to show how both Fe and Fi are misrepresented, but then I realized that someone would accuse me of misrepresenting function descriptions.

    The content of my quotes, quite surprisingly, can be found in most function descriptions regarding Fe and Fi (it's subtly stated, to be fair); even in Gifts Differing.
    Yeah, the difference in the way you expressed it was so unsubtle that I felt a need to call it out and see what you intended.

    I don't remember how Gifts Differing handled it, I haven't looked at that book for some years. I expect there to be some subtle bias by nature in everything, though, since humans are human; it's when there's a gross disparity that I look more closely.

    My definitions of Fi and Fe (and other pairs) would contain both strengths and weaknesses.

    My own view on typology is that they are all like lenses through which to view the world, and each is looking at something different, so it depends on what your needs are that determines what lens you use. (Of course, some lenses can have larger imperfections and scratches than other lenses.)

    SO I do find JCF useful. However, a problem is that it isolates a piece of the psyche and looks at it in context of itself, wheras functions would actually all be operating in relation to each other. So you get some more clarity in regards to how that isolated piece isolates, whereas in MBTI or Keirsey temperament (which isn't MBTI either), you are getting more tandem understanding of how they work together as a unit.

    Really, it got popular in the last few years because MBTI had gotten so damned muddy once it really got sucked into the public vernacular.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

Similar Threads

  1. Does anyone else's personality change with the seasons?
    By badger055 in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 12-31-2013, 04:38 PM
  2. Explain the cognitive functions to me
    By Colors in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 07-31-2012, 10:40 PM
  3. does anyone else make up a lot of ideas for computer games?
    By Zergling in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-27-2008, 04:46 PM
  4. Images of the Cognitive Functions
    By Mort Belfry in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 07:15 AM
  5. Does anyone else visit this site?
    By The Ü™ in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 10:23 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