# Thread: Functions: Xi vs. Xe

1. Originally Posted by dissonance
You didn't understand. Fe and Fi can come to THE SAME CONCLUSION. Fe and Te by definition cannot.
Surely, you can't be serious.

2. Originally Posted by Lateralus
Surely, you can't be serious.
Um... yes I am quite serious.

Do you know the functions? Thinking can only output true/false, Feeling can only output good/bad.

No offense, but if you have another definition, you are wrong.

Listen, I'm not saying ETJs and EFJs can't come to the same conclusion. Just that the functions themselves have no overlap.

3. Originally Posted by dissonance
Um... yes I am quite serious.

Do you know the functions? Thinking can only output true/false, Feeling can only output good/bad.

No offense, but if you have another definition, you are wrong.

Listen, I'm not saying ETJs and EFJs can't come to the same conclusion. Just that the functions themselves have no overlap.
You just said they can't come to the same conclusion.

Fe and Fi can come to THE SAME CONCLUSION. Fe and Te by definition cannot.

There is a difference between functions and type. I'm talking about functions, you're talking about type.

5. Originally Posted by dissonance

There is a difference between functions and type. I'm talking about functions, you're talking about type.
And I still don't agree. The path to reach that conclusion differs, but they can still reach the same conclusion.

6. Originally Posted by dissonance
It seems like it doesn't make sense to think of the eight functions as entirely separate. Fe and Fi have overlap, Ti/Te, Ni/Ne, Si/Se.

So I propose that there are only four functions (not that this is completely new or anything). Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition. There is a spectrum of Introversion to Extroversion for each function. It should not be thought of as binary.

In most cases, people significantly prefer one direction for each function, but there's no reason this should be true in all cases. It does make sense to me that Introversion in one P function leads to Extroversion in the other (same for J functions). But it's never going to be 100% Ni/0% Ne and 100% Se/0% Si. Thinking of Ne and Ni as separate ideas just seems misleading to me (true for all functions).
This is similar to how I think of it. There are really four functions and two manifestations to each function. Fi, Ti, Ni, and Si all have a fair amount in common in that all have traits that you would associate with introversion (and it's similarly true for Fe, Te, Ne, and Se with extraversion).

All of this is how I think of things on a purely theoretical/cognitive level. When you are looking at how a person behaves the J/P dimension can have a significant effect on behavior.

7. Originally Posted by Lateralus
And I still don't agree. The path to reach that conclusion differs, but they can still reach the same conclusion.
Lol. You're still talking about type, dude.

The point of the functions is that they're distinct. Type is the interaction between functions.

If you think that Fi and Ti can reach the same conclusion, you don't understand the functions. Straight up.

Yes, a Ti user and an Fi user can reach the same conclusion, but that's because they both use all four functions, not because Ti and Fi do the same thing.

Anyways, I think the people that listened got my point. That's as much as I can do.

8. Originally Posted by prplchknz
time for another installment of talking out my butt: I think Fi and Fe are different enough. My room mate (INFJ) and I can be presented with the same information and if we're both using our feeling function will often come to a different conclusion. She generally looks at past experiences and what society says to do, I'm sure she does do some comparison aswell. I look at past experience and compare and contrast them to the present situation, how close I am to the person, how many times has this person screwed me over in the past? then I go through different scenerios in my head and try to predict the outcome of each one. So yeah same amount information two different reactions, and I don't think their's a right way. It's just she sticks to rules she's made up, and thinks to be the ultimate truth. and I don't have any rules set in stone, mostly because I don't believe in an ultimate truth.
Not to pick on just you, but your example is very funny to me, because I relate quite a lot to how you describe yourself, prplchknz. I relate little to how you describe your roommate. I've also tended to test with pretty high Fi, and often-times pretty low Fe.

But according to nearly everyone who knows me, I'm a bona fide INFJ. I'm pretty much the only one who questions that. So...all of this is to say that I tend to lean towards what dissonance is talking about (that is, if I'm actually interpreting the initial post correctly)...the spectrum of cog. function usage. One INFJ may place more importance (or to use mbti lingo, may have higher preferences for) on Fe than another, so the end result is they may process/decide on things somewhat differently. And one INFJ may have very stunted Fi use whereas another may prefer it a lot more. Then it becomes more hazy, but since dominant is the same, they're just different flavors of INFJ, I suppose. In some ways I'm quite different from the INFJ's I know -- probably why I relate a bit more to your description. ;-)

9. ^Yeah. And not only do INFJs differ by how close to extroverted in the feeling spectrum they fall (ditto for other functions), they also differ by how much they use feeling compared to the other three functions.

10. ## Visualizing/Conceptualizing

I am kind-of thinking about cognition as a shape (I'm thinking elipsoid right now) in a three dimensional space, where the cognitive functions become projections on to some vectors (I am thinking 45-degrees into their respective quatrants in the "judgement plane" or "perception plane"). The percpetions and judgement planes as joined along the E-I axis.

Here is a potential elipsoid (and there are man potential ones for a given type) for an ESTP:

Need to cogitate on this some more. I wonder is I can mathematically prove that a 3D-elipsoid can account for all possible scores on the congitive functions test. Seems plausible... need more cogitating.

#### 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