You sound not to agree with Myers by stating so.
I'm not sure, since i have no specific references to something she said specifically. If there are any books or articles written by her, i'm not familiar with it.
I would just comment that that is perhaps how you yourself understand what Jung has written. You should read or re read Ch X Psychological Type
Nope. That is not what I understand. What I understand is that with different psychological function, what each personality can be conscious of is different. It largely depends on each functions consciousness nature.
Yes, sure, it might be different interpretations. Not going to argue about that. By the end of the day, we see the world from different points of views.
I could re-read it, however, i'm not sure if i would actually reach to your understanding. I agree with the conscious aspect of it, i actually pointed that out in of the posts you quoted in the thread, but it's still this. That's why typing is very tricky (if you want to do it accurately, or objectively), because you have to take a real look inside in why you avoid certain things or situations. Why the things that "trigger" you, really trigger you and how that influences behavior. But you do use all the functions, it's impossible to stat that you don't. You do use them. If i didn't use Si, i wouldn't be able to know that, as i stated before, i have to avoid putting my hand in the fire. I know it burns, so i won't do that. That's pretty much Si. I wouldn't know that fire is called "fire". I wouldn't know what "burning" is. And i wouldn't even know what "burning" feels like or what is heat, or actually perceive any sensory information if i didn't have Se in the first place. But i am an Ni dom, so how's that? It's because i just hate to pay attention to it. I hate having to actually look at the time to see what time it is. I hate to have to actually go look for facts and books if i could just figure the thing that i want to figure out by myself. I perceive it, i realize that it exists. It just annoys me. Because overtime, i developed an affinity for the Ni function. I could explore different possibilities of things that might be good for me (Ne), how would i know what's good for me if i don't go after it? Because i don't want to, because i have something that i envision and that i dedicate my attention to and i don't want to diverge from that (Ni). I recognize that the other parts exist, i just don't want to pay as much attention to them. And i really avoid one in specific, Se, because it is the one that takes me away from my Ni most of the times. You can't really "Ni" if your "Se'ing". And if you really want to "Ni your way through life", having to "Se" sometimes will be annoying as hell. But all of that isn't 100% conscious. I had to really work on this to be able to notice it.
I would comment you need to elaborate on this. Neurological disabilities and cognitive disorder should be explained. Sometimes i feel that you use too many concepts that you expect others are familiar with also as you may be, whereas they should be clarified, at the very least: giving a definition.
My inf-Se is getting triggered right now, but let's go look for references lol
"Cognitive disorders are a category of mental health disorders that primarily affect learning, memory, perception, and problem solving, and include amnesia, dementia, and delirium." I got it from
here. It's not a scientific paper, but i'm to lazy to go through one right now. If you're willing to find anything more in-depth please let me know, but anyway.
I think that sums it up. I don't think that a lack of se,si,ni,ne can CAUSE dementia. But i think that it's fair to say that if you were to analyze the psychological/behavioral patterns of someone with impaired neurological systems, you'd see a WILD difference in perceiving functions in them in contrast to a neuro-typical human. I think it's safe to say that someone with impaired problem solving doesn't really recognize Ne. Someone with a pathological reckless behavior might not really recognize Ni.
Now let's take a look at delirium.
"Delirium develops rapidly over a short period of time and is characterized by a disturbance in cognition, manifested by confusion, excitement, disorientation, and a clouding of consciousness. Hallucinations and illusions are common, and some individuals may experience acute onset change of consciousness. It is a disorder that makes situational awareness and processing new information very difficult for those diagnosed. It usually has a high rate of onset ranging from minutes to hours and sometimes days, but it does not last for very long, only a few hours to weeks. Delirium can also be accompanied by a shift in attention, mood swings, violent or unordinary behaviors, and hallucinations. It can be caused by a preexisting medical condition. Delirium during a hospital stay can result in a longer stay and more risk of complications and long terms stays" - got it
here. You can check for their actual references in the "references" part of the page.
We gotta admit that this sounds like someone who has a lot of trouble recognizing S. But that doesn't mean that every N dom in the world has delirium episodes. Most of them don't. But we can all agree that all of people that actually have pathological delirium episodes have very little access to their sensory functions.
Let me clarify that the absence of use in these functions cause this type of things. I'm just saying that people that suffer from this, most likely don't have any sort of grasp in some of their perceiving functions at all, if you were to look at it through an Jungian lens. Their cure and treatment lies in the neurological field, of course, but i'm just entertaining what would theoretically happen if you didn't have access to a cognitive function. Meaning that, if someone doesn't really have access to those functions, you might have neurological conditions.
Nope. This is not what I understand nor what Jung did. Type with Si pairing with one of the extroverted judging psychological functions can still gather sensory information but get conscious of and respond differently with type with Se at their stack.
Si with ENTP is paired with Fe, would behave naturally judgmental; they judged things and make decision and take actions based on feeling, if balanced (since Fe-Si is available at tertiary and inferior function at their stack). ENTP could even be like a soldier or a warrior that is naturally performed by ESFJ, if well balanced. What ESFJ do could be what ENTP do also, when they behaved like ESFJ using their Fe-Si pair.
Se with one of introverted judging function will naturally behave perceivingly; they observably behave like a perception maker.
I have an example for Se and Si. it happened when a sun eclipse happened couple of years ago. I wanted to capture the moment with my camera so I brought my camera outside when the eclipse was happening. I passed a bistro and overheard that a waiter mumbled that the eclipse was just like a sickle and continued to serve customers
Do you notice the similarities and difference? I was preparing to capture the moment by photographing it and actually I did, while she only judged the eclipse. I wanted to capture the moment since it is a rare happenings. I cannot expect that sun eclipse happens every day. So when that rare moment happened, I took a picture for it. My behavior and her were different as a response to a similar event: a sun eclipse. The factual even may have been the same: the sun eclipse, but the response was tremendously different. Why we had a different response to similar event? if you tried to explain it by MBTI, it is explainable. My observable behavior is identified as sensory perceiving one that is making a photograph, while her is judgmental with by mumbling" the eclipse is just like a sickle." and continued to work. Behaviorally, Mine was to make a perception: a photograph itself, her was only to judge and ignored. That behavior gives some clue to the underlying cognitive functions, further. Still Referring to Myers, introverted perceptive functions, paired with any extroverted judging function, a behavior resulted will be like XXXJ, an introverted judging function paired with extroverted perceiving function will result with a perceptive behavior XXXP. Since both of us did a practical action, our behavior is associated with sensory functions, not the intuitive one. I acted like XXSP and she acted like XXSJ.
That was not the first time. In 1996, a sun eclipse happened. I was just a kid. I wanted to observe the sun eclipse but direct staring with naked eye could blind our eye. So i decided to watch it through a very black negative film. Our family maid knew that eclipse happening but she seemed not to pay much attention to it. She is judger and by observing the eclipse through a very black negative film, I was acting like a perceiver, in MBTI terms.
[/SPOILER]
Yes, i see your point. It's pretty much what i see, in different words. What i was arguing is that ENTPs do have and use Se. But when using their S functions, they'd probably be more in touch or more aware of their Si. Or at least it would influence their behavior or respond to their unconscious traumas or whatever, more than Se. Because when they want to gather information (or look at it in a objective way, whatever you prefer) they'd use their intuition way more than their senses, due to unconscious preferences. But they do perceive the objective sensory, otherwise they'd probably have the delirium episodes i mentioned above. If they don't, it probably means that they're se users, just not as much as si users probably and, not neeeeear as much as Ne and Ni.
Not to have Se( extroverted sensation) function in your stack means everything that psychological function :Se can get conscious of can never be conscious to the psyche.
I apologize, but i'm not sure if i got this.
What you mean is that, the Se function works, however it will never be as psychologically conscious as Si. Did i get this wrong?
Would you imply only a psychopathic man could get all the functions working? Four functions work at your stack would be possible, if we were balanced. But even if we got successfully get conscious of feeling and thinking, intuition and sensation, some functions that are not available at our stack can never be balanced by the person himself.
I would say you could be psychopathic, if you thought that you had all 8 psychological functions at your stack although they might not work perfectly fine.
I'm not sure. I don't think so. I think that the psychopathic man would use some functions into a "perverse" agenda. And he'd recognize that, he just wouldn't care. That's my opinion at least. I think that psychopaths, for instance, use Fe way better than most people. They identify and play by your values, your feelings and etc so that they can manipulate you. You have to recognize Fe and use it extensively when manipulating someone. Psychopaths do this all the time. So i think that psychopaths, might have a better access to their judging functions maybe, or at least to Fe and Te. But i'm not sure about all 8. I'm not a connoisseur of psychopathic behavior, so it's difficult for me to say.
My comment for this would be: I wish I could process everything and got conscious of everything, but what I learnt in typology, that is not possible, even if I wanted to so much.
Oh, i agree with that. You can't. When going through this post, i'm using all my 4 functions. I'm aware of only Ni and maaaybe Si right now. I know what i want to say, and how i should say it, what i should reference, etc etc (Ni+Si). But even then, it's not totally conscious. I'm in auto pilot, as everyone is, 90% of the time. That's why it's difficult to type yourself. You're only aware of what you're doing and thinking about very few times. Most of the times, you're not aware of what you're doing. So usually, the perception you have of yourself is all mixed up.
I used to think that i was either an ISTP or an ENFP when in actuality, i'm probably an INTJ and maybe an ENTJ. Because if i were to describe myself, i would describe the smaller part of me that i really wanted to come out, or that i really want to be because i identify with it, but it only comes out like 10% of the time. The rest of the time i'm being this arrogant, loner, bossy, know-it -all asshole that get's angry when people don't do things according to the way i think they should, because after all, i know better (Ni), i know what best works for everyone and screw you individuality (Te) and shut up about it. Of course i don't really see myself that way, but this is who i am when i'm in auto-pilot. Which is, most of the time.
Just to clarify, i know i'm not this asshole i just described above, but that would be the closest description to my actual behavior than to the one i thought i had lol
But, on the second thought I'd say:
Would you imply that I have an antisocial disorder and an antisocial one can get themselves killed?
Getting ourselves killed: suicide can happen if we get depression.
Oh, not in a suicidal way. What i meant was, that if you want to be by yourself, and i mean, literally, without anyone else, you'll get yourself killed because the human being needs outside help. If you lived in a jungle by yourself, it's way more likely for you to die sooner than someone that lives with a pack of other humans. And that kinda applies to todays life as well. If someone really didn't wanted help from anyone. Friends, family, uber drivers, teachers, doctors, etc. how long do you think that person would last?
You could be projecting this, which means that could be you who want to commit suicide but tell it was me who wanted to do so. If it happened that you wanted to commit it, you probably are in depressed mental state and probably had the same warrior soul like Japanese samurai who commit seppuku in order to restore honor as a part of their Bushido way of life .
However, If it happened that you get depressed, and experience a suicidal thought, you should visit a psychiatrist. If you are sure that you have a warrior soul, you should join the military if still possible.
But Even if you get depressed and wanted to commit suicide, but you hold a religious teaching that forbids it, you probably won't. I remember that My mother (ESFJ) once said that if she was not afraid of die as a "kafir" , she would commit suicide. Looks like She had felt an urge to but she didn't do it, since she must hold that suicide is forbidden that one could die" kaifr "if committed that she doesn't want to.
Get your point. I don't think suicide and mental state in this front has anything to do with cognitive functions per se. I'm sorry about your mother. I had friends that went through similar periods. I had a deep depression a couple years back, didn't consider suicide, but i know how it is.
And maybe, if i were to analyze in jungian terms, the belief in external codes (Te/Fe) can actually save you from a depressed state, in some cases. It's an interesting point.
But again, i'm sorry about your mother and this story. Don't want to be insensitive.