User Tag List

Results 1 to 9 of 9

  1. #1
    Member Vorthos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ENTp Ne
    Posts
    73

    Arrow The concept of cognitive functions seems flawed

    Based on what I've read, a person has a preference for certain cognitive functions, and an aversion to others. I've also read that there are four preferred functions and four avoided functions for each MBTI type, and that the combination and order of them is unique to a type. Another point that I've read suggested that our types (and preferred cognitive functions) usually do not change, and this is the point that makes the concept of preferred and avoided functions seem flawed.

    Arguing from my own experience (unfortunately it's all the "evidence" I have) it is entirely possible to be completely comfortable using both Ti and Te, same goes with Ni and Ne. The preference of one over the other can be so weak as to be negligible, so why is there the concept of avoided and preferred functions? Whether or not I use an "e" or "i" function depends entirely on the context: things like my environment, or what I want to know or find out. It isn't even guaranteed that I'll use the same function the next time I'm in the same situation. If we don't change our personality types, and I indeed use contradictory function comfortably, then some element of the concept of cognitive functions has to be wrong, since there's a contradiction somewhere.

    I am aware that an argument based on one person's experience isn't particularly compelling, and logically, either I'm wrong or everybody who agrees with the theory of cognitive functions is wrong–and the latter seems unlikely to me as well.

    Either way, I'm curious to see how everybody responds!
    (Translator's note: keikaku means plan)

  2. #2
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,863

    Default

    I think you've been reading some strange material about this.
    "If you try to build something that is idiot-proof, the universe will build a better idiot."
    I'm an extrovert trapped within an introverted soul.

  3. #3
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    554

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vorthos View Post
    Based on what I've read, a person has a preference for certain cognitive functions, and an aversion to others. I've also read that there are four preferred functions and four avoided functions for each MBTI type, and that the combination and order of them is unique to a type. Another point that I've read suggested that our types (and preferred cognitive functions) usually do not change, and this is the point that makes the concept of preferred and avoided functions seem flawed.

    Arguing from my own experience (unfortunately it's all the "evidence" I have) it is entirely possible to be completely comfortable using both Ti and Te, same goes with Ni and Ne. The preference of one over the other can be so weak as to be negligible, so why is there the concept of avoided and preferred functions? Whether or not I use an "e" or "i" function depends entirely on the context: things like my environment, or what I want to know or find out. It isn't even guaranteed that I'll use the same function the next time I'm in the same situation. If we don't change our personality types, and I indeed use contradictory function comfortably, then some element of the concept of cognitive functions has to be wrong, since there's a contradiction somewhere.
    Dario Nardi's functions test is arguably the most-linked-to cognitive functions test, but as further discussed in the spoiler in this post, INTJs typically get high Te scores and high Ti scores (with Te not substantially favored over Ti), when they take Nardi's test. They also get high Ni scores and high Ne scores (with Ni not substantially favored over Ne). And INFJs often get Fi scores that are as high or higher than their Fe scores. And all the IN types tend to relate pretty strongly to Ti. And so on. As I understand it, there has never been a cognitive functions test where the results come anywhere close to lining up with the Harold Grant model expectations, where INTJs are supposedly Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTPs are supposedly Ti-Ne-Si-Fe.

    Mal may be right that you've been reading some bad cognitive function sources, but that's hardly surprising, since there's really no such thing as a good cognitive functions source.

    And there's more on that in the spoiler.

    Likes Nicodemus, Noon, an hero liked this post

  4. #4
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,283

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vorthos View Post
    Based on what I've read, a person has a preference for certain cognitive functions, and an aversion to others. I've also read that there are four preferred functions and four avoided functions for each MBTI type, and that the combination and order of them is unique to a type. Another point that I've read suggested that our types (and preferred cognitive functions) usually do not change, and this is the point that makes the concept of preferred and avoided functions seem flawed.

    Arguing from my own experience (unfortunately it's all the "evidence" I have) it is entirely possible to be completely comfortable using both Ti and Te, same goes with Ni and Ne. The preference of one over the other can be so weak as to be negligible, so why is there the concept of avoided and preferred functions? Whether or not I use an "e" or "i" function depends entirely on the context: things like my environment, or what I want to know or find out. It isn't even guaranteed that I'll use the same function the next time I'm in the same situation. If we don't change our personality types, and I indeed use contradictory function comfortably, then some element of the concept of cognitive functions has to be wrong, since there's a contradiction somewhere.

    I am aware that an argument based on one person's experience isn't particularly compelling, and logically, either I'm wrong or everybody who agrees with the theory of cognitive functions is wrong–and the latter seems unlikely to me as well.

    Either way, I'm curious to see how everybody responds!
    I think those functions are pretty different which makes me think you might not be differentiating between the functions properly. I have noticed people who prefer Ti think VERY differently than I do for example. It's not the same at all.

    How would you define Ti vs Te or Ni vs Ne?

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

    Tri-type 639

  5. #5
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    1,862

    Default

    Tbh, I don't feel that I have a solid enough argument to really be confident in my usual belief that the cognitive functions exist and tend to relate in a certain way to each other depending on the person's type, and that this means preferring some functions and not others - or at least naturally using some and not others.

    However, for myself personally I relate strongly to Si and I think I'm very far away from Se (although I find the other functions a bit hard to determine, except that I don't really relate to Ne), and I seem to get on well with people who use the same functions as me (by use I mean... last 3 letters of type code are either the same or all flipped). There are exceptions to who I get along well with, but I do see these as simply being exceptions. After all, there is more to a person than type, and you may relate to someone based on a large number of those other factors.

  6. #6
    Member Vorthos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ENTp Ne
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think those functions are pretty different which makes me think you might not be differentiating between the functions properly. I have noticed people who prefer Ti think VERY differently than I do for example. It's not the same at all.

    How would you define Ti vs Te or Ni vs Ne?
    I've scoured the Internet for definitions of Ti, Te, Ni, and Ne, and the best I can come up with are Titanium, Tellerium, Nickle, Neon.

    But actually, from what I gather, the gist of the definitions is that Te thinks about order and control, and Ti thinks more about concepts. Ni is "gut feel" intuition, and Ne is kinda like connecting the dots. I get that these definitions are horrible, but I mean them more to be a summary.

    I agree that Ti and Te are quite different, but is it completely impossible to frequently switch between the two?
    (Translator's note: keikaku means plan)

  7. #7
    alchemist Legion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    1,862

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vorthos View Post
    I've scoured the Internet for definitions of Ti, Te, Ni, and Ne, and the best I can come up with are Titanium, Tellerium, Nickle, Neon.

    But actually, from what I gather, the gist of the definitions is that Te thinks about order and control, and Ti thinks more about concepts. Ni is "gut feel" intuition, and Ne is kinda like connecting the dots. I get that these definitions are horrible, but I mean them more to be a summary.

    I agree that Ti and Te are quite different, but is it completely impossible to frequently switch between the two?
    Both Ti and Te are based around concepts (according to Jung). Te is directed towards the object, then goes to subject and back to object. Likewise, Ti goes subject to object to subject. So either way you are constantly alternating between the subjective and objective factors. So a difference is in motivation - whether you are focused on refining the internal schema, or on applying concepts to build an understanding of a thing. This is similar to what you said I guess, just wanted to throw it out there.

    From what I understand, Ti and Te users show markedly different patterns of brain activity (Dario Nardi).
    Likes Noon liked this post

  8. #8
    Member Vorthos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Socionics
    ENTp Ne
    Posts
    73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion View Post
    Both Ti and Te are based around concepts (according to Jung). Te is directed towards the object, then goes to subject and back to object. Likewise, Ti goes subject to object to subject. So either way you are constantly alternating between the subjective and objective factors. So a difference is in motivation - whether you are focused on refining the internal schema, or on applying concepts to build an understanding of a thing. This is similar to what you said I guess, just wanted to throw it out there.

    From what I understand, Ti and Te users show markedly different patterns of brain activity (Dario Nardi).
    But can't motivations change? Also, just to make sure I'm getting this right, what do you mean by "internal schema"?
    (Translator's note: keikaku means plan)

  9. #9
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,863

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    Dario Nardi's functions test is arguably the most-linked-to cognitive functions test, but as further discussed in the spoiler in this post, INTJs typically get high Te scores and high Ti scores (with Te not substantially favored over Ti), when they take Nardi's test. They also get high Ni scores and high Ne scores (with Ni not substantially favored over Ne). And INFJs often get Fi scores that are as high or higher than their Fe scores. And all the IN types tend to relate pretty strongly to Ti. And so on. As I understand it, there has never been a cognitive functions test where the results come anywhere close to lining up with the Harold Grant model expectations, where INTJs are supposedly Ni-Te-Fi-Se and INTPs are supposedly Ti-Ne-Si-Fe.

    Mal may be right that you've been reading some bad cognitive function sources, but that's hardly surprising, since there's really no such thing as a good cognitive functions source.

    And there's more on that in the spoiler.

    That was a very good, albeit one-sided, explanation in the spoiler.
    "If you try to build something that is idiot-proof, the universe will build a better idiot."
    I'm an extrovert trapped within an introverted soul.

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] the application of cognitive functions in tess of the durbervilles
    By skylights in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-04-2011, 05:20 PM
  2. The Role of Shadow Functions in MBTi Type
    By MerkW in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-03-2010, 11:26 PM
  3. Critique the concept of "Cognitive Functions"
    By Quinlan in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-13-2010, 04:27 PM
  4. Disliking the concept of "fun"
    By Xander in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 95
    Last Post: 11-28-2008, 12:26 AM
  5. The order of your functions
    By animenagai in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: 10-08-2008, 07:51 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