User Tag List

First 234

Results 31 to 40 of 40

  1. #31
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    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).
    No..., they do not overlap. Jung says that they are clearly different. In fact Te has more in common with Se and Fe than Ti, Ne and Se are common, but not Ne and Ni and so on. Although they share the same judging perceiving title, Jung states a distinct difference of the functions based on the attitudes (E/I).

  2. #32
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    One Te and one Ti can both output "false". Therefore there is overlap. There is no overlap between N, S, T, and F.

  3. #33
    Senior Member "?"'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    TiSe
    Posts
    1,167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dissonance View Post
    One Te and one Ti can both output "false". Therefore there is overlap. There is no overlap between N, S, T, and F.
    Te (like all extraverted functions) outputs or decides based on the objective whereas Ti (like all introverted functions) inputs or decides on the subjective. Here is an excerpt from Jung:
    There is also, however -- and now I come to the question of the introverted intellect -- an entirely different kind of thinking, to which the term I "thinking" can hardly be denied: it is a kind that is neither orientated by the immediate objective experience nor is it concerned with general and objectively derived ideas. I reach this other kind of thinking in the following way. When my thoughts are engaged with a concrete object or general idea in such a way that the course of my thinking eventually leads me back again to my object, this intellectual process is not the only psychic proceeding taking place in me at the moment. I will disregard all those possible sensations and feelings which become noticeable as a more or less disturbing accompaniment to my train of thought, merely emphasizing the fact that this very thinking process which proceeds from objective data and strives again towards the object stands also in a constant relation to the subject. This relation is a condition sine qua non, without which no think- [p. 431] ing process whatsoever could take place. Even though my thinking process is directed, as far as possible, towards objective data, nevertheless it is my subjective process, and it can neither escape the subjective admixture nor yet dispense with it. Although I try my utmost to give a completely objective direction to my train of thought, even then I cannot exclude the parallel subjective process with its all-embracing participation, without extinguishing the very spark of life from my thought. This parallel subjective process has a natural tendency, only relatively avoidable, to subjectify objective facts, i.e. to assimilate them to the subject.
    I am not saying there is an overlap between the extraverted functions, but merely that they can have as much if not more similarity with one another than their introverted counterparts.

  4. #34
    Senior Member sciski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    NSFW
    Enneagram
    6w7
    Posts
    468

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Delphyne View Post
    Maybe she´s ESFJ.
    *high fives for compromise!*

  5. #35
    mountain surfing nomadic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    Well, in theory a 3-D ellipsoid has 8 degrees of freedom (3 degrees for the origin, two degrees of freedom for the three axis, and 3 for the length, width, height along those axis). 8 degrees of freedom,8 functions--seems plausible.

    I was actually trying to think through the equations of projections of the ellipsoid on the various "plane vectors" representing function scores.

    Any 3-D ellipsoid can be specified by a 3x3 positive definite matrix, B, (defines axis and "lengths" along those axes), and a 3-D vector, r, (defines the origin).

    The bounds of the ellipsoid are defined by the solutions to the equation:

    [(x-r)^T][B^-1](x-r)=1


    Each cognitive function vector would have a 3x3 projection matrix, P, of rank 1. These matrices are symmetric and have the property that P^2=P.

    Now the projection of the solutions to the equation above using P becomes the solutions to:
    [(y-Pr)^T]P[B^-1](y-Pr)=1

    I was thinking that I could make the function score of the ellipsoid to be given by the maximum valued solution to (8 versions of) the above equation.

    For convenience, lets denote the Projection Matrix by the actual function name.

    Si score = max y such that, [(y-Sir)^T]Si[B^-1](y-Sir)=1
    Ni score = max y such that, [(y-Nir)^T]Ni[B^-1](y-Nir)=1
    Se score = max y such that, [(y-Ser)^T]Si[B^-1](y-Ser)=1
    Ne score = max y such that, [(y-Ner)^T]Ni[B^-1](y-Ner)=1
    Fi score = max y such that, [(y-Fir)^T]Si[B^-1](y-Fir)=1
    Ti score = max y such that, [(y-Tir)^T]Ni[B^-1](y-Tir)=1
    Fe score = max y such that, [(y-Fer)^T]Si[B^-1](y-Fer)=1
    Te score = max y such that, [(y-Ter)^T]Ni[B^-1](y-Ter)=1

    Note: in all the above equations the "y" is independently bound, that is, each y is a different y (I just didn't want to do y_Si, y_Ni, etc.).

    Other things to note:
    -The directions of the axes of the ellipsoid are given by the eigenvectors of B, and the "half-axis length" along those axes is given by the square-root of the corresponding eigenvalues.
    -B must be positive definite, and because of that, it must be symmetric (we're dealing completely with real-numbers here).

    With the things noted above, we've now created a framework of 9 scalar variables.


    --b1 b2 b3
    B=b2 b4 b5
    --b3 b5 b6

    --r1
    r=r2
    --r3


    Given the eight constraints above and one more for positive definiteness, it seemed like it was doable.

    The issue is that I haven't yet thought thought what vectors should represent the functions, and I need to make sure that equations given from the projections are independent (or at least not contradictory).


    Your 8 functions should be bound by 4 pairs. they can't be independently bound...

    for instance: Si score = Max Y so that Ysi = 1 - Yni and Ne score = max Y so that Yni = 1-Ysi.

    crap im late for an appointment. will get back to you on the rest of this later...

  6. #36
    no clinkz 'til brooklyn Nocapszy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    Reading through this thread...
    So much needs fixed. So much...
    And then I think to myself that I don't care. Or something like that.
    Even though I do.

    Ever just run out of energy?

    Well anyway, then I saw this.
    Quote Originally Posted by ygolo View Post
    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.

    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-perception_plane-gifFunctions: Xi vs. Xe-judgement_plane-gif

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

    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-estp_example-gif

    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.
    Ygolo deserves respect.
    He's at least on the right track.
    I'm telling you dudes... there's shit that each function has in common. Before you can really generalize I and E, you're gonna have to figure out...
    Hmm you can't really do that.

    Introversion is like having an internal standard of how shit needs to be, and extroversion is having no standard, but just employing what's available to you by "The world" I know that's what everyone likes to say "the external world" like there's two different worlds... Where do these fuckers get these ideas anyway?
    Like they're separate or something. Where did that idea even come from?
    Like Te prefers to measure things in inches. Ti doesn't care about that. Just as long as it fits. Ti will make Pe 'eyeball it' and make sure it fits. Excusing that, Ti doesn't even measure. In fact, measurement is only an external thing. After all, Pe is the thing measuring it for Ti. Ti just gives confirmation of whether or not it's appropriate. But it's still involving 'the world' right? What's there to decide on if not the world?
    What's to measure in inches by Te, if not the accurate size for the chair in the ESTJ's den? Sensory ideal. The ideal says to Te "yes 15 is appropriate" and etc.

    Just take that formula down the line.
    If it doesn't work then get a book or something I can't figure out how to explain it anymore.

    I don't even think the point of this site is to discuss MBTI.
    That's a joke. It's far too complicated and not everyone agrees (even though, I'm actually the one who's right) so no real learning can go on. Plus no one really tries.
    Yes, socializing. More about jokes and veiled trolling. Good work so far everyone .

    I couldnt' stay away.


    And if you're curious, don't bother asking. I'm not even sure if I'm being sarcastic.
    But I am right.

  7. #37
    veteran attention whore Jeffster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    7w6 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    6,727

    Default

    I'm beginning to think I'm too stupid for this forum.
    Jeffster Illustrates the Artisan Temperament <---- click here

    "I like the sigs with quotes in them from other forum members." -- Oberon

    The SP Spazz Youtube Channel

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Modern Nomad View Post
    Your 8 functions should be bound by 4 pairs.
    You are right. That does seem to make things simpler than little nudges to the function
    vectors or using “antiprojectors.”
    Let introduce a proper coordinate system so that the words “max” and “min” make sense.
    We take the S-N axis be the first dimension with S positive.
    We take the F-T axis be the second dimension with F positive.
    We take the E-I axis be the third dimension with E positive.

    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-se_ni_proj-gifFunctions: Xi vs. Xe-si_ne_proj-gif
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-fe_ti_proj-gifFunctions: Xi vs. Xe-fi_te_proj-gif
    Attached Images Attached Images

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  9. #39

    Default getting the scores from the ellipsoid

    We can get the scores from the ellipsoid, like this I think:
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-se_ni_eq-gif
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-si_ne_eq-gif
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-fe_ti_eq-gif
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-fi_te_eq-gif
    Now, I need to eat, but then I can work on getting the ellipsoid from the scores, prving a 1-1 mapping if I am correct. I'm gettting ahead of my self, but perhaps I can make a visualization program to see peoples ellipsoids based on functions....first to eat, and go out w/ friends...probably not till tomorrow with this stuff.
    Attached Images Attached Images

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

  10. #40

    Default I was wrong

    At least on the purely mathematical mapping, I was wrong.
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-cog-func-constraints-gif
    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-cog-func-grind-gif

    This is, of course, an over-constraint of the origin. I was thinking with playing with widths, axes, and origin, we’d have enough, but the origin itself is over-constrained.

    Functions: Xi vs. Xe-cog-func-const-gif

    Unfortunately, it runs into the same problem that many other visualizations I’ve tried. There is a mismatch between extroverted/introverted perception and extroverted/introverted judgment. It seems like we really cannot join the two types of extroversion/introversion. I wonder if this is fundamental, or if there is some trick of visualization I haven’t considered.

    So the choices, a “best fit” ellipsoid, using 4-dimension, or a more complex shape (like Modern Nomad suggested).
    Attached Images Attached Images

    Accept the past. Live for the present. Look forward to the future.
    Robot Fusion
    "As our island of knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance." John Wheeler
    "[A] scientist looking at nonscientific problems is just as dumb as the next guy." Richard Feynman
    "[P]etabytes of [] data is not the same thing as understanding emergent mechanisms and structures." Jim Crutchfield

Similar Threads

  1. about function order vs strength
    By INTP in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-27-2010, 01:36 PM
  2. Xe vs. Xi: Discriminating word pairs
    By Economica in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-21-2009, 04:59 PM
  3. Cognitive functions vs. umm... the other thingy =)
    By /DG/ in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 05-20-2009, 09:57 PM
  4. Help with jungian dichotomies vs. cognitive functions
    By Scytale in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-09-2008, 01:23 PM
  5. [JCF] How my Ti functions (crude representation) vs. F in an "argument"
    By MacGuffin in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 09-20-2007, 06:13 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