Wanonymous
New member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2017
- Messages
- 25
- MBTI Type
- INFJ
Here's the problem that I have with cognitive functions theory: there is no clear definition of these functions that we can all rely on. Most descriptions I have seen from people on forums, websites and blogs are blurred with examples that says something like "people using this function tend to (insert behavior)..". Sure, these examples are good to have when a clear description of how the functions WORK are given, but otherwise they are bothersome. There is no clear source to understand how these functions work at the root level. It's all very subjective, with most claiming that their understanding of the functions is the correct one. I think this is one of the main reasons why typing oneself can be so challenging. If we want to succeed in understanding this theory (and ultimately finding our true type), we must find an objective way of doing so. I don't think most people really know what they are talking about when describing the functions. We must find a clear definition of the mechanism of the functions that we can agree on, and I believe a key step to doing so would be going back to what Jung wrote...