• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Are Function Tests Really Useful?

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Maybe, just maybe, I don't understand your Finglish?

Who knows if thats also one of the reasons, but i still think the major thing is about you not having proper definitions for words. I mean im not even going to try to speak with correct terms, because if i would use terms like tension between opposites, teanscendent function, compensation etc and talk of deriving complexes from unconscious etc, it wouldnt make much sense to you, instead i need to explain these quite complex terms all the time in order to communicate a simple thing for you. So yea it kinda requires some extra english skills..
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Who knows if thats also one of the reasons, but i still think the major thing is about you not having proper definitions for words. I mean im not even going to try to speak with correct terms, because if i would use terms like tension between opposites, teanscendent function, compensation etc and talk of deriving complexes from unconscious etc, it wouldnt make much sense to you, instead i need to explain these quite complex terms all the time in order to communicate a simple thing for you. So yea it kinda requires some extra english skills..

I do know it's one of the reasons. I don't find "Was That Really Me?" very difficult to comprehend. You'll say I've latched onto the "Fe" examples. But what I want to know is how the inferior function passes on its unconscious content to the tertiary.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
lol.

I'll post your whole quote:



I think whatever goes on the unconscious is a crapshoot. I'm sure they mix all up in there together and have a great time.

I'm speaking to differentiated, preferred functions. The more differentiated, the more preferred. When you pull a function out for use from your unconscious, you use it alone, I believe, and Jung was adamant about that reg F/T and N/S especially (not that i buy it totally myself 100%), not with another function, despite what happens down below in the psyche.

Does your unconscious Fe affect your Ti when you say something, and that makes it appear Te? Mkay. Whatever you say. For me, Ti is Ti, etc. and so on. Not some muddled function soup.

My point was, Guru II, that no one knows wtf is happening. It's basically ALL up for conjecture. Isn't it?


~Aphrodite

Its not so simple that more differentiated = more preferred.

So what you are arguing against is the idea that unconscious functions(or images/fantasies created by undifferentiated functions in combination with complexes) lead to projections, to which we react consciously with our differentiated functions. Right?
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
You see, INTP, the above is an example of someone attempting to debate with a Genius such as yourself. So far all I have done is ask questions in an effort to gain a deeper understanding of your point. So please learn to differentiate the two kinds of posts.

You havent asked a single question from me in this topic lol.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
You havent asked a single question from me in this topic lol.

I'm trying to gain understanding of your point. Isn't that better than simply blurting out that I disagree and here's why?
 

AphroditeGoneAwry

failure to thrive
Joined
Feb 20, 2009
Messages
5,585
MBTI Type
INfj
Enneagram
451
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Its not so simple that more differentiated = more preferred.

So what you are arguing against is the idea that unconscious functions(or images/fantasies created by undifferentiated functions in combination with complexes) lead to projections, to which we react consciously with our differentiated functions. Right?

No. That sounds logical enough.

This is what I found exception to: Your post on Page 1:

So for example with this my Fe Ti looking like Fi, was because i was only able to consciously handle Fe by handling Ti(to which Fe was chained to) and because my conscious attitude was towards introversion, my F seemed introverted also, since introversion was what i was conscious of, but it was Ti that i was using to control the Fe.

That. And I've always had issue with that with others that speak like that about functions. Several do it on here and I'm not sure where you guys learn it.....? Chained functions across the Conscious Divide? Rational functions controlling other rational functions?

I was pretty sure Jung said we have a dominant, highly preferred function, and the rest were basically inferior. I don't see them controlling each other. I see the dominant controlling, or bending them, to its will as needed; or the dominant getting bent toward the opposite orientation in a highly chronic stress environment, but not really any others than that.

You can handle Fe, just like I can handle Ti.

Plus F is F and T is T. It is hard to know where Fe ends and Fi begins; they likely work together often and we just can't zero in very easily on every nuance of thought or action we have....
 

Jaguar

Active member
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
20,647
Nah, i was Jaguar

Nah, you're still copying Lark's projecting routine.
If you jokers don't like what someone says, you tell them they're "projecting".
By the way, learn how to spell transcendent function. It's not spelled like this:

teanscendent function

Carry on, college boy:

so i recently started a psychology course at open university and it happened to start with personality psychology. we were given option where instead of doing an exam of the books we read/lectures, we are allowed to make essay about something related to personality psychology. im considering of doing one about jungs typology and other typologies that are built on jungs model, like mbti, socionics, keirseys etc. it needs to be 16 pages long, so there isnt enough room to make descriptions of types, but i got few topics to write about in mind:

-introducing the functions
-function usage/roles and their effect on types, how different types use same functions. not going to do this for every type, but was thinking of using an example on one type or two types that i would compare
-interaction with different types and how different function usage can cause misunderstanding or "natural" understanding of other person
-why different types use their natural function, like why INTP uses TiNeSiFe, and not TiNiSeFi for example. also adding some criticism/pondering on why/if Fi in INTP(for example) is not real usage of Fi and if its really Fe+Ti working together or if it can be real Fi, but most the times its just introverting Fe using Ti
-about strong functions vs function roles
-differences between jungs work, mbti, socionics, keirseys model etc. (what parts work in some typologies and what doesent)
-problems on testing the types
-what they are useful for

the essay should be mostly about writing about other peoples work and not too much of self theorizing, so the subjects should be something that i could find some writings(and their sources) about.

anyone got some ideas for more topics i could write about?
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
I do know it's one of the reasons. I don't find "Was That Really Me?" very difficult to comprehend. You'll say I've latched onto the "Fe" examples. But what I want to know is how the inferior function passes on its unconscious content to the tertiary.

Well the only asnwer i can give for that is that brains use action potentials to communicate info from a neuron to neuron. But if its the case of undifferentiated function(which inferior quite often is) passing its info to differentiated function(which tert not always is), is throught projections, instincts, dreams etc to which we react with our conscious processes.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
This thread amuses me :).
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Well the only asnwer i can give for that is that brains use action potentials to communicate info from a neuron to neuron. But if its the case of undifferentiated function(which inferior quite often is) passing its info to differentiated function(which tert not always is), is throught projections, instincts, dreams etc to which we react with our conscious processes.

Isn't that kind of answer about neurons just materialism which forms the basis in psychology for behaviorism?
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
No. That sounds logical enough.

This is what I found exception to: Your post on Page 1:



That. And I've always had issue with that with others that speak like that about functions. Several do it on here and I'm not sure where you guys learn it.....? Chained functions across the Conscious Divide? Rational functions controlling other rational functions?

I was pretty sure Jung said we have a dominant, highly preferred function, and the rest were basically inferior. I don't see them controlling each other. I see the dominant controlling, or bending them, to its will as needed; or the dominant getting bent toward the opposite orientation in a highly chronic stress environment, but not really any others than that.

You can handle Fe, just like I can handle Ti.

Plus F is F and T is T. It is hard to know where Fe ends and Fi begins; they likely work together often and we just can't zero in very easily on every nuance of thought or action we have....

When im talking about functions chaining to others, im not saying that its a permanent condition(even tho it happens quite often, more often than people realize), but dependant on the situation/whats being processed. These chains happen because we project our unconscious images (created by undifferentiated functions in combination with complexes in these cases) and process them with our conscious functions.

This Fe controlling Ti is a result of Fe images are being projected and sending instincts to consciousness saying "think of this/this is important" etc, to which the differentiated functions are forced to react(that is if the instincts are strong enough that they cant be pushed back into unconscious).

Now when my Ti for example was reacting to my Fe this way, it looked like Fi, simply because i was unaware of my Fe projecting stuff to one person and tried to handle this Fe projection using T in introverted attitude. It wasnt that i was trying to make an introverted feeling judgment, i was trying to make introverted thinking judgment. Basically i made an unconscious Fe judgment about a persons worth to me, which i saw as her real value, but the whole situation(and this worth of her to me which i perceived) didnt make any sense to me, so i tried to abstract from her value using Ti. Now when you are trying to use T for F value judgment, it will naturally look as if you were doing F evaluation and because introversion is my most differentiated attitude in judgment, the thing that looks like F is in introverted attitude, but this introversion/abstraction is done by using T on F matter, so its not Fi what comes out of this, it just looks like Fi. That beebes demonic 8th function description gives a perfect description about how the whole thing progressed, but assumes that its Fi, just like those function tests.

On that last bold part, i think i should had said, that it was Ti that i tried to use control my Fe. Naturally this doesent work if the instinct coming from inferior is strong enough.

Rational function can only push the opposite into unconscious and that way get a control over it. This "battle" between dom and tert is what jung called tension between the opposites(but that opposites thing can be used on other stuff unrelated to typology also).
I suggest reading this: http://www.nyaap.org/jung-lexicon/t/#transcendentFunction

And the resolution for this is tert function: http://www.nyaap.org/jung-lexicon/t/#tertium

And the funny thing is that(before me reading jung) when i had this Fe problem, i thought it was Fi, what got me out of it was realization about the subjectivity of my Si. With this also came the realization that i was using FeTi all along, not Fi. I consciously perceived 'what is'(S) inside me(I) and could see that this Fe thing was just a projection and realized how little in fact i know this person afterall, started seeing all these things that made her sooo sweet and lovliest person in the world in totally different light. And only then was able to start differentiating my Fe, because i needed an differentiated Si to control it, instead just fighting back at it with Ti. Even tho this happened nearly 2 years ago, i still remember the moment really vividly, it was like waking up from a dream.

Anyways, jung is right about typology and MBTI/keirsey/whatevers suck balls :yes:
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Actually this is false, jung talks quite alot about undifferentiated functions mixing together in 'psychological types'

Fusion of the psychological functions, of thinking with feeling, feeling with sensation, feeling with intuition, and so on, is archaic, as is also the fusion of part of a function with its counterpart.["Definitions," CW 6, par. 684.]
Functions are senses of meaning, that, as was once described to me, when undifferentiated are tied to the emotional responses to life, as mobilized by the dominant function.
The opposite functional perspective is always implicit in a situation, because when we look at it through a function and orientation, we are in essence dividing the situation that in complete form consists of both tangible and conceptual (S/N), and technical and humane (T/F) aspects, which both emerge and vary, and can be stored or set in our memory (P/J).

The orientation of the functions is generally set by the dominant orientation (i or e), but since the undifferentiated functions are "mixed together" (as you put it), then they can be paired with the opposite orientations. And it will be generally the archetypal complexes that produce the orientations.
Even Quenk (Was Tat Really ME, p.40) cites Jung-Myers' approach as specifying that we are free to use each of the four functions in either attitude at times. We prefer one and suppress the other, but it still comes up from the unconscious a times. It is after all, not consciously controlled (and hence, usually associated with some stressful or negative situation). But that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist in the person's psyche.
 
Top