Crazy concept?

[rav3n]

Is it possible that instead of cognitive processes being separate as defined by Jung and MBTI, that the only division is between extraverted and introverted processes, where the two source from our internal values and are simply aspects of the same, in a similar manner as Hindu Gods and Goddesses?

 

[rav3n]

This type of musing is fun, playing with possibilities whether it's meaningful or not. A form of extraverting in diarrhea form, internal mental meanderings or for the over-active mind, pinging off internal walls.

Anyways, imagine the above where values are the drivers, sending hooks out to counterbalancing sides of introverted and extroverted processes. As we age, our neural pathways get trimmed through the human brain creating natural efficiencies of getting rid of unused pathways. So as we age, the more we use the same neural pathways (hooks to the two processes), the more likely we will continually react in the same fashion as long as our values don't change or change much. This crazy hypothesis might explain why not everyone's cognitive processes fit the MBTI stereotype since we all have different values.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Is it possible that instead of cognitive processes being separate as defined by Jung and MBTI, that the only division is between extraverted and introverted processes, where the two source from our internal values and are simply aspects of the same, in a similar manner as Hindu Gods and Goddesses?

That's essentially how I decided that I used Ne instead of Ni. If I am understanding you correctly all your really going after is the fact that the functions are all generally the same, in their own realm of processing, it's just the direction which we decide to take with them (i.e. I vs E). Is that close?

 

[rav3n]

That's essentially how I decided that I used Ne instead of Ni. If I am understanding you correctly all your really going after is the fact that the functions are all generally the same, in their own realm of processing, it's just the direction which we decide to take with them (i.e. I vs E). Is that close?

Kind of, except that we will always use both I and E to counterbalance each other. But if you notice, I and E are the sole dividers. What we know as functions might be aspects of the same process/function, whether it's the internal or external wheel.

I call them wheels since reliant on what our driving values are, the wheel can turn and we have the ability to hook into other aspects when needed or if an unfamiliar situation happens where we need other skills beyond our most used aspects.

Don't know if that makes any sense. I'm kind of playing around with thoughts right now.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I got the gist of it I think.

Your idea reminds me of a similiar thought I had, if not the same. More in-depth of what I said a post ago is:

All I was eventually trying to figure out was directionality, I call it. All sensing functions, all intuitive, all feeling etc. are similiar. It's only the fact that one would be an external wheel, to mesh in with your theory and the other is the internal wheel. You're throwing out function order, which is perfectly fine. I have my own thoughts on that. The four groups are only divided between what is displayed in the outside world and what is displayed inside yourself, but the core of the function is the same.

However, I think what happens when you add 'e' and 'i' into the mix is that these functions can be altered in some way with other functions which blends them together, so Ne and Ni are different in minor ways. Kind of like the discussion about Ni being more time based because it relates closer with Si and Ne being more space based because of Se's involuntary influence. Am I deviating?

 

[rav3n]

You're bang on!!

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Sweet! Such a good feeling.

I don't think that such a theory is crazy. It seems much more logical and even more in line with what Jung writes about, if I remember correctly.

 

[rav3n]

Nice going!

To kind of explain why it appears we have function order is that it has to do with similar values. If our values say we must be open-minded but objective, we'll hook into the aspect of Ti and whatever supporting extroverted aspect to counterbalance. If our values say we must try to be objective but conclusive, we'll tap into the aspect of Te and whatever supporting extroverted aspect to counterbalance. And maybe there are a percentage of individuals who were raised with similar foundational values so we're all hooking into similar aspects.

As previously expressed, mental diarrhea!

 

[Sunny Ghost]

cognitive functions on a space/time frame... interesting. where do we fit F and T?

 

[Sunny Ghost]

Nice going!

To kind of explain why it appears we have function order is that it has to do with similar values. If our values say we must be open-minded but objective, we'll hook into the aspect of Ti and whatever supporting extroverted aspect to counterbalance. If our values say we must try to be objective but conclusive, we'll tap into the aspect of Te and whatever supporting extroverted aspect to counterbalance. And maybe there are a percentage of individuals who were raised with similar foundational values so we're all hooking into similar aspects.

As previously expressed, mental diarrhea!

oh, just saw this.

and i'm lost here.

 

[rav3n]

oh, just saw this.

and i'm lost here.

Take a look at my previous drawing. Those hooks are neural pathways selected by our values to access the necessary aspects.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

Nice going!

To kind of explain why it appears we have function order is that it has to do with similar values. If our values say we must be open-minded but objective, we'll hook into the aspect of Ti and whatever supporting extroverted aspect to counterbalance. If our values say we must try to be objective but conclusive, we'll tap into the aspect of Te and whatever supporting extroverted aspect to counterbalance. And maybe there are a percentage of individuals who were raised with similar foundational values so we're all hooking into similar aspects.

As previously expressed, mental diarrhea!

Mental diarrhea is my specialty... wait. Hahaha.

This reminds me somewhat of how Socionics is set up. A much more fluid version though seeing as we can use all the function sets. The fact that the first two functions are meant solely to counterbalance each other in the best way possible to have the most efficient thought process. Ti would need to latch on to the opposite Se/Ne in order to encompass the most amount of area (grasping of a concept). Consistency in values is what keeps type the same, I'd say that's true. It would also make sense when dealing with Ne-er's like myself. Of course we only deal with the conceptual aspect of changing beliefs we don't actually change them unless the judging function next to it decides as such.

 

[rav3n]

Mental diarrhea is my specialty... wait. Hahaha.

This reminds me somewhat of how Socionics is set up. A much more fluid version though seeing as we can use all the function sets. The fact that the first two functions are meant solely to counterbalance each other in the best way possible to have the most efficient thought process. Ti would need to latch on to the opposite Se/Ne in order to encompass the most amount of area (grasping of a concept). Consistency in values is what keeps type the same, I'd say that's true. It would also make sense when dealing with Ne-er's like myself. Of course we only deal with the conceptual aspect of changing beliefs we don't actually change them unless the judging function next to it decides as such.

Kind of been avoiding Socionics since the two systems aren't equal but they've started using similar MBTI naming conventions. Talk about mass confusion. Maybe I'll take a closer look at their fluid system.

One thing I would like to stress. Not trying to pass any of this off as serious theory, just playing around with thoughts and concepts. Fun stuff.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

No problem. And I suppose I should be more clear. Your idea is the more fluid version of socionics. I always thought that the only difference between the two systems was simply one of them has a slightly different way of detonating the same principle ideas. Plus one of them is more relationship/societal based if you will.

Tossing around ideas is extremely invigorating, thank you for the opportunity.

 

[rav3n]

Thanks for playing. It's also cool to see that another member has had similar thoughts.