User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 91

  1. #31
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    Here are my functions in order from http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/as...velop_old.html

    [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] Ti (19 bars)
    [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] . . . .Te
    [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] . . . .Ne (16 bars)
    [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][] . . . . . Fi (15 bars)
    [][][][][][][][][][][][] . . . . . . . . .Si
    [][][][][][][][][][][][] . . . . . . . . .Ni (12 bars)
    [][][][][][][][][][][] . . . . . . . . . .Se (11 bars)
    . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Fe (0 bars, wtf?)

    It's pretty surprising to find out that my Te is so high, but I guess it makes sense because I tend to not shut the fuck up about stuff.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  2. #32
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    The problem here is that Te and Ti (for example) are not really different functions. It's misleading to think of it that way. The best way I've thought of to conceptualize the system is that there are FOUR functions (Thinking, Feeling, Sensing, and Intuition) and an Introversion/Extroversion score for each one.
    That is perhaps the original Jungian conncept (though I'm seeing it said that some of what he wrote was sometimes contradictory). [cont'd]
    Quote Originally Posted by Ne-Monster View Post
    I disgree greatly. From my perspective Fe and Fi are universes apart from one another. It is almost like Ti and Fi function in a more similiar way than Fe and Fi or Te and Ti. I am putting what little brain power I have into Ti and Te right now as I think they do very different things as well-it isnt simply orientation internal and external. I posted somewhere else that Fe and Fi look like two people speaking spanish and portugease. It sounds similiar at first and they may think they understand each other to some extent. But in reality much is being lost or misinterrpreted. I think Te and Ti may be acting the same way.
    ...From what I have come to see lately, the attitude (e/i) is tied more to the person (ego) than to the functions. So a type starts with an introvert or extravert who uses his dominant function in his preferred orientation. The function then takes on the characteristics we call Xe or Xi. The auxiliary then takes on the rejected other orientation. the other functions remain undifferentiated, but come up in the complexes represented by the archetypes.[cont'd]

    Quote Originally Posted by FlamingMask View Post
    I am interested why you don't think anything beyond 1, 2, and 4 should be standardized. Why not just 1 and 2, or why not 1-4 - or the first 5? Why did you settle on those three? I'm not really disagreeing I'm just curious.
    ...Because of the fact that again, everything the ego rejects is undifferentiated. When the dominant is established in the preferred attitude, the other three functions and the opposite attitude are rejected into the unconscious. Hence, in the original order, the aux. tertiary and inferior were all said to be the opposite attitude. So the aux. is in the opposite attitude, and then the Puer complex (according to Lenore Thomson) when it comes into consciousness then adopts the tertiary function and orients it in the dominant attitude.
    The anima remains in the opposite attitude with the inferior function. It's because of this dispute as to the orientation of the tertiary that 1, 2 and 4 were specified above. They were the most definite.
    Beebe then extended it by paralleling these four functions with those of the reverse attitude, and indentified four more complexes that manifest themselves through them.

    It really has nothing to do with relative strengths of the functions. Much of what is coming up on those tests is probably undifferentiated function behavior, and not any real ego-consciousness. Hence, beyind the dominant and auxiliary, we really can't use the rest of it to type ourselves.

    See
    http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...tml#post748446
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  3. #33
    Member FlamingMask's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTp
    Posts
    79

    Post

    I see. Jung placed a lot more emphasis on introversion vs. extraversion than we usually do. And I do realize we sort of force our shadow functions into the roles they are associated with, instead of realizing that they manifest themselves in that way under certain circumstances. But we can still see that Ti and Te are different. I mean, there are plenty of INTPs whose Ti is incredibly developed but their external life is an organizational disaster.

    I admittedly don't know that much about the shadow processes and other terminology for cognitive processes. I'm looking forward to looking into it more later.
    I (89%) N (88%) T (88%) P (56%)

    Ti > Ne > Ni > Te > Si = Se > Fi > Fe

    Enneagram: 5


  4. #34
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Yeah; I forgot to add that this perspective makes it understandable why on the MBTI, E/I is a separate dichotomy to begin with. Looking at cognitive processes as eight distinct entities in themselves, it was tempting to say that E/I really did not mean much; as it only indicated the "attitude" of the "dominant" function. I had started saying that the cognitive process test should have been the official MBTI. But seeing it the original Jungian way, E/I is a personality factor in it's own right (like it was in older temperament theory).
    What we had done is conflated the processes with the complexes/archetypes.
    And yes, Thinking used in an inner or outer orientation will come across differently.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  5. #35
    Member FlamingMask's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    INTp
    Posts
    79

    Default

    Let me try to get this straight - you think that of the four main processes, the one that is represented in a dominant function of a person will the best split between it's e/i focus? Like an INTP will easily be able to differentiate between their Ti and Te and perhaps their Ne and Ni, but probably not their S and F functions? And this is isn't necessary, because only the first two processes and someone's introversion/extroversion score is needed to find their MBTI type?
    I (89%) N (88%) T (88%) P (56%)

    Ti > Ne > Ni > Te > Si = Se > Fi > Fe

    Enneagram: 5


  6. #36
    . Blank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6
    Posts
    1,202

    Default

    I couldn't tell you when I differentiate between Ti and Te, personally.
    Ti = 19 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Te = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ne = 16[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fi = 15 [][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Si = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Ni = 12 [][][][][][][][][][][][]
    Se = 11[][][][][][][][][][][]
    Fe = 0

    -----------------
    Tiger got to hunt, bird got to fly;
    Man got to sit and wonder why, why, why;
    Tiger got to sleep, bird got to land;
    Man got to tell himself he understand

  7. #37
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,438

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FlamingMask View Post
    Let me try to get this straight - you think that of the four main processes, the one that is represented in a dominant function of a person will the best split between it's e/i focus? Like an INTP will easily be able to differentiate between their Ti and Te and perhaps their Ne and Ni, but probably not their S and F functions? And this is isn't necessary, because only the first two processes and someone's introversion/extroversion score is needed to find their MBTI type?
    No; that's not what I was saying. The dominant function will be used in the dominant attitude. The auxiliary will be in the "rejected" opposite attitude. Those are the only two normally differentiated. Differentiated doesn't mean simply "split between e/i focus" like both are now equal and distinct. Differentiated means "specialized" for specific tasks, basically.

    Here, Lenore explains the concept:
    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.personalitypathways.com/thomson/type3.html
    The word "differentiation," after all, is analogical. Jung borrowed it from the field of developmental biology. Before a fertilized egg implants itself in the uterine wall, it's an undifferentiated cell mass. It's only after implantation and division that individual cells begin to differentiate. And what this means is that the cells become specialized, turning some genes off and others on, so that the cells are capable of supporting particular tasks in the growing embryo. For example, some cells differentiate for the operation of the heart, thereby becoming what the heart needs in order to grow and develop. Once a cell specializes, it acquires a "type," and it's suited to support a particular system of the body.

    It seems to me that Jung borrowed these existing terms deliberately. Undifferentiated functions are like undifferentiated stem cells. That is, they're conflated with each other, without specialized purpose, operating in concert with our emotional needs. However, as a person adapts to a particular environmental context, one of those functions becomes differentiated, supporting the expression of developing strengths in real-world terms.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.personalitypathways.com/thomson/type3-1.html#question
    As I see it, a differentiated function is not a cognitive process. It's the means by which emotion is integrated with the operations of the executive brain in the conscious decision to take action.

    Undifferentiated functions remain allied with the unconscious emotional subsystem, and they're always operating to bring their products to consciousness. But their products may not reach awareness unless they're consonant in some way with the interpretive principles the dominant function has set up.
    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.personalitypathways.com/thomson/type3-2.html
    In Jung's type theory, our dominant function will naturally reflect our Extraverted or Introverted temperament. The other three orientations remain aligned with the unconscious life of the body, and they compensate the conscious point of view by way of the opposing attitude.

    This is why an Introverted Thinker with auxiliary Intuition is diagrammed Ti-Ne-Se-Fe in classic Jungian terms. There aren't 8 cognitive processes that offer us skills we need to develop in order to be whole. There are 4 functions, and by differentiating one, we've set aside some of our generic potential for the sake of real-world form.

    Whatever we habitually put aside to make our willful conscious choices will inevitably make its alliance with the unconscious -- emotions we don't want to feel, desires we don't recognize, the body itself.
    Last edited by Eric B; 08-21-2009 at 07:15 PM.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  8. #38
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    Here are some quotes I grabbed from Jung-I am still ruminating on what they really mean and looking for how they play out in Ti/Te differences so I hope they are some use for you guys as well.

    I often engage in debate with my bf ENTP. I very much enjoy it but as of late I have been paying attention-we are not following the same tracks in our logic or discussion. I cannot always follow where she goes-haha, sometimes I fill in the gaps with blah, blah, blah even until she touches a point I can recognize.

    At the same time I will use Te to debate/discuss the argument back and I see the same thing-she cannot logically follow all of the time. Sometimes we restate the argment a few times back and forth until we get what we are trying to say.

    We pass the discussion back and forth each making misteps but together coming up with well rounded ideas. Also in meetings I notice she will dive right into a logical progression of Ti ideas-too deep in fact. I have to step in every so often and point the focus back to the big Te picture about why the logical progression is important, then she goes back to the progression.

    Papa Jung:
    Introverted thinking is primarily oriented by the subjective factor......introverted thinking is concerned with concrete or with abstract objects , always at the decisive points it is oriented by subjective data. It does not lead from concrete experience back again to the object but always to the subjective content....it begins and ends with the subject, far though it may range into the realm of actual reality. With regard to the establishment of new facts it is only indirectly of value, since new views rather than knowledge of new facts are its main concern...it wants to reach reality to see how the external fact will fit into and fill the framework of the idea....introverted thinking shows a dangerous tendency to force the facts into the shape of its image ....

    Jung and Te verses Ti:
    Orientation to the object as already explained makes no essential change in the thinking function; only its appearance is altered. It has the appearance of being captivated by the object as though without the external orientation it simply could not exist. It is almost as though it were a mere sequela of external facts or as though it could reach its highest point only when flowing into some general idea. It seems to be constantly affected by the objective data and to draw conclusions only with their consent.

    In its essence this extroverted thinking is no less fruitful and creative than introverted thinking, it merely serves other ends. This difference becomes quite palpable when extroverted thinking appropriates material that is the special province of introverted thinking; when for instance a subjective conviction is explained analytic ally in terms of objective data or as being derived from objective ideas. For our scientific consciousness however the difference becomes even more obvious when introverted thinking attempts to bring objective data into connections not warranted by the object-in other words to subordinate them to a subjective idea. Each type of thinking senses the other as an encroachment on its own province, and hence a sort of shadow effect is produced, each revealing to the other its least favorable aspect. Introverted thinking then appears as something quite arbitrary, while extraverted thinking seems dull and banal. Thus the two orientations are incessantly at war.

    The thinking of the extraverted type is positive ie productive. It leads to the discovery of new facts or to general conceptions based upon disparate empirical material. It is usually synthetic as well.

    Even when it analyzes it constructs, because it is always advancing beyond the analysis to a new combination, to further conception which reunites the analyzed material in a different way or adds something to it.

  9. #39
    Priestess Of Syrinx Katsuni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    3w4?
    Posts
    1,238

    Default

    It's just an example, and there's also the possibility of people misreading it as well yeu have to take into account. On my second attempt at checking myself I got INTP instead of ENTP, though every subsequent test after has always been ENTP, and after reading the descriptions, entp's way more accurate for me.

    The thing is though... I'm very conflicting as well myself, my actions do not neccesarily match my strengths, this isn't exactly uncommon to be honest. A personality is not directly tied to whot yeu're 'good' at, how many people LOVE doing exercize, but their bodies just aren't capable of it? I physically have the genes and specialized muscle structure that I'm one of the few people physically capable from birth of being a sprinter, but I really don't care for it at all.

    Same thing cognitively, someone may be a math wizard but hate math, and really really want to be an artist... but sucks at it. They may end up having to combine the two by making fractals or something; just because we're good at thinking in a certain way doesn't mean we WANT to think that way.

    For another personal example, one more dedicated to mindset, I am creative in some rather disturbing ways, it's not uncommon for me to come up with bizzarely intricate and ridiculously disturbing forms of torture, it doesn't mean I actually LIKE thinking about these things, and it can often be rather unnerving to just realize that while laying down trying to sleep or something end up with a startlingly long list of horrible things to do to someone, and it's far from desireable. I'd really rather not have that happen, and yet it seems to be a natural affinity, a talent of which I have no control over. The mind works in odd ways... our biggest advantage is we have the opportunity to understand it and go against our base programming; just because our brain wants to do one thing doesn't mean we HAVE to give into it.

    My absolute basic personality without any restraint is cruel, malicious, greedy, overbearing, and quite a few other horrible things I'd rather not mention. Yet I go quite far out of my way to keep such traits restricted and buried, to act the way I want to be. We can embrace some of our traits, and go against others. Our values can be different than our mindset, and with a bit of nurturing the ideals we prefer, we can better ourselves in the long run, at least by our own standards. I'll admit that lately my cynicism has escaped a bit more than I'd like, and I'm nowheres near the naive idealist I may've once been, but I guess we can't have absolute control and just magically "make ourselves into someone else" either. Just work on whot we have to start with.

    That being said, let's go to a final example, something a bit more accurate to deal with the types...

    I think as an ENTP, however, at the very least the T could just as easily been F, the thing is I've seen far too many cases of people who are heavy on the Feeling side of things, to the point that they abhor rational thought I swear. I've gone far out of my way to make sure I don't fall down that same path, as such, it's meant that whot was probably a very slight advantage on the F>T, has turned over time into a heavy bias towards T>F. Innately I still have a strong F but it's kind of been neglected and shoved in the corner, then shot at a few times to make sure it doesn't try to move. I still fully have a capable F aspect, and all it honestly needs is a bit of attention dedicated to it, but I really don't feel like doing that, and am going to continue to let it languish as it is.

    The chances of finding someone who PERFECTLY matches their personality type in the exactly expected order, is probably not really all that great, because it just assumes that we are limited to whot our initial design is and that no effort, no training, no nurturing on our part will ever have any effect.

    This's hardly the case, but neither do we have full reign over who we want to be either. Moreso, I think the best way to explain it is that we are born with several strengths and talents, and several drawbacks, some even crippling at times. This immediately off the start limits how many paths we have available to us, but it doesn't force us down a single one. How yeu grow and whot yeu decide to do with whot yeu have will be whot decides which path yeu eventually take. We're not completely free to do anything we want, but we're not restricted to a single unerring path from birth either.

    The ones who match their type perfectly, are honestly the ones I worry about the most, because it generally means they didn't do much with their lives to try to change who they were. On the other hand, if yeu're nowheres near where yeur mental strengths are, it probably means yeu're trying just a bit too hard to deny yeur own self as well.

  10. #40
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,004

    Default

    The thing to keep in mind is that no matter what your function STRENGTH is according to those tests, the function USE will not change because of that.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

Similar Threads

  1. 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
  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. [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
  4. 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