[Jungian Cognitive Functions] A new vision of MBTI and function stacks: Open function stack

[Eric B]

If those parallel and reflections are direct related to the cognitive functions, they are testable then.
Actually, this principle "The more you pay attention to one thing, the less you are paying attention to its opposite" is used to build the function stack, isnt it? Thats how the "4th" function (for INTP its Fe) is determinated in function of the 1st function, Ti, isnt it? The cognitive function opposite table, mirror table, reflection table, is like this:
Fi<--->Te
Fe<--->Ti
Ni<--->Se
Ne<--->Si

Problem is on the 2nd and 3rd function on the stack. If they are opposites, why they are so close? If the function stack was only 4 that was ok, but it has 8 positions besides our 4th cut version. There is this inconsistency in the parallel. If we apply this principle to all positions, cognitive functions should have a this symmetry:
Ti-Ne-__-__-__-__-Si-Fe
With Si and Fe at last positions, because "The more you pay attention to one thing, the less you are paying attention to its opposite".

as I said, the correlation analysis shows there are some truths but instead of chained rules I get repulses/attractions through correlations.

Again, the functions aren't eight "things"; it starts with S, N, T, F (the middle two dichotomies, basically), and then four complexes take them and assign the position and attitudes to them. The order is basically set by the complexes, and the complexes are what get less conscious the further down you go, and start with the first two (the ego itself, and the auxiliary "caretaker", which is what sets the function "whose nature is different from, though not antagonistic to, the leading function".
So the "other four" are just the same four functions with the attitudes reversed, which perspectives are paid to even less than the first four, and picked up by four more negative versions of the first four complexes. Because it starts with the initial attitudes of the four functions, that's why the diametric opposites of #1 and 2 aren't 7 and 8, though in Lenore's model, it is set up like that, because 7 and 8 are the same hemisphere brain alternatives which come up first when the dominant can't solve a problem (until we learn to turn to the tertiary more). And then 5 and 6, the direct "shadows" of the dominant and auxiliary, are also stronger than the tertiary and inferior.

But this is still ordering by strength; 1-4 likely will fall into that order, but it's 5-8 (the Shadows) that really don't follow any particular order (again, the numbering is just to show the parallel to 1-4), so you can still see it the way you have it.
Here you can see the reflecting and shadowing dynamic: http://www.erictb.info/shadowreflections.png

 

[Vendrah]

Again, the functions aren't eight "things"; it starts with S, N, T, F (the middle two dichotomies, basically), and then four complexes take them and assign the position and attitudes to them. The order is basically set by the complexes, and the complexes are what get less conscious the further down you go, and start with the first two (the ego itself, and the auxiliary "caretaker", which is what sets the function "whose nature is different from, though not antagonistic to, the leading function".
So the "other four" are just the same four functions with the attitudes reversed, which perspectives are paid to even less than the first four, and picked up by four more negative versions of the first four complexes. Because it starts with the initial attitudes of the four functions, that's why the diametric opposites of #1 and 2 aren't 7 and 8, though in Lenore's model, it is set up like that, because 7 and 8 are the same hemisphere brain alternatives which come up first when the dominant can't solve a problem (until we learn to turn to the tertiary more). And then 5 and 6, the direct "shadows" of the dominant and auxiliary, are also stronger than the tertiary and inferior.

But this is still ordering by strength; 1-4 likely will fall into that order, but it's 5-8 (the Shadows) that really don't follow any particular order (again, the numbering is just to show the parallel to 1-4), so you can still see it the way you have it.
Here you can see the reflecting and shadowing dynamic: http://www.erictb.info/shadowreflections.png

This requires an assumption that the first 4 are conscious function and others 4 are unconscious function, right?
I wouldnt risk jumping to that assumption so quickly. As I said, unconscious is very unknown; Im not saying that he/she/it doesnt play a role, but admiting to know exactly which role is played by the unconscious is quite a big jump...
Anyway, Im although Im almost done on the quest to give cognitive functions some use, since my idea seems to do ok on most pratical cases, Im still investigating alternatives (not on a hurry anyway).

 

[Eric B]

Consciousness is a product of the ego and the other complexes. It's not something that is inherent in the functions themselves, the way we often make it sound. So the dominant and auxiliary complexes will tend to be the most conscious, and bring the associated functions into consciousness most frequently. The others will vary according to experience and situations. The tertiary and inferior complexes are still "ego-compatible", and thus will tend to have more "positive" use when bringing their functions into consciousness (depending on maturity level); where the remaining four are more negative, and this is what gets them cast into the "Shadow" (which also can vary, as far as which stack positions are conscious or not).

 

[Vendrah]

Consciousness is a product of the ego and the other complexes. It's not something that is inherent in the functions themselves, the way we often make it sound. So the dominant and auxiliary complexes will tend to be the most conscious, and bring the associated functions into consciousness most frequently. The others will vary according to experience and situations. The tertiary and inferior complexes are still "ego-compatible", and thus will tend to have more "positive" use when bringing their functions into consciousness (depending on maturity level); where the remaining four are more negative, and this is what gets them cast into the "Shadow" (which also can vary, as far as which stack positions are conscious or not).

Consciousness is more than just the cognitive function, and "unconsciousness" as well. There is not enough information to say that the dominant and auxiliary are the closest to the consciousness, or to determine which cognitive functions are conscious or not...

 

[Eric B]

Of course, consciousness is more than just the functions! But the dominant is the one that has been chosen as the ego's main "world view", and as the ego is the center of consciousness, that will naturally make the function the most consistently conscious. The auxiliary complex will have as its agenda cognitive "balance", as introversion and extraversion will both need to be involved, and we must both take in information (perceive) and make decisions with it (judge). So that's what makes us be able to identify a "dominant" and "auxiliary" function.
Again, the "functions" aren't really what's "conscious" on their own; it's the complexes (senses of "I" that we cognize through) that bring them into consciousness. Determining them is a matter of recognizing and identifying which S, N, T or F, by i or e perspective your ego's agendas are most driven by, and which other one supports it through the other means of processing (j or p).

 

[Vendrah]

Although i havent pointed directly, there was a pre-"experiment" about this, that I used to refine the theory before going to the topic. There are results on it, and basically, I cant edit anymore but I should observe that this theory is not working for I-E for a matter of different definitions for I-E. So, its worth having a look on the result that also explains why its not working for I-E:

https://www.typologycentral.com/for...tive-functions-preferences-5.html#post3172492

Of course, consciousnessis more than just the functions! But the dominant is the one that has been chosen as the ego's main "world view", and as the ego is the center of consciousness, that will naturally make the function the most consistently conscious. The auxiliary complex will have as its agenda cognitive "balance", as introversion and extraversion will both need to be involved, and we must both take in information (perceive) and make decisions with it (judge). So that's what makes us be able to identify a "dominant" and "auxiliary" function.
Again, the "functions" aren't really what's "conscious" on their own; it's the complexes (senses of "I" that we cognize through) that bring them into consciousness. Determining them is a matter of recognizing and identifying which S, N, T or F, by i or e perspective your ego's agendas are most driven by, and which other one supports it through the other means of processing (j or p).

Ok, I already got enough tips to work through time, at least from you lol.
Still many things I pointed doesnt change much.

EDIT: Sorry to address you so short but I think that this "discussion" is becoming quite pointless.