What does it mean if your function stack doesn't match up to the stereotype?

What does it mean if your function stack doesn't match up to the stereotype?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
Thank Tree51Thanks

This is a discussion on What does it mean if your function stack doesn't match up to the stereotype? within the Cognitive Functions forums, part of the Personality Type Forums category; First off, apologies if this has already been asked and answered - I can't find anything on it . With ...

  1. #1
    INFP - The Idealists

    What does it mean if your function stack doesn't match up to the stereotype?

    First off, apologies if this has already been asked and answered - I can't find anything on it .

    With that said, what does it mean if your function stack isn't what the stereotype prescribes? For me it's meant to be Fi -> Ne -> Si -> Te. Except, my stack seems to test as either Ni or Ti, and Te usually is pretty down on the list.

    I understand that MBTI and all of this is general, but what can cause this?

    And this is the other question: if the inferior function is atypical to the type, does it mean that it would exhibit the same characteristics as it would in a typical person of the "correct" type, ie, for me Ni behaving as it would be in an ESFP
    Julia Bell thanked this post.



  2. #2
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Quote Originally Posted by snowbell View Post
    First off, apologies if this has already been asked and answered - I can't find anything on it .

    With that said, what does it mean if your function stack isn't what the stereotype prescribes? For me it's meant to be Fi -> Ne -> Si -> Te. Except, my stack seems to test as either Ni or Ti, and Te usually is pretty down on the list.

    I understand that MBTI and all of this is general, but what can cause this?

    And this is the other question: if the inferior function is atypical to the type, does it mean that it would exhibit the same characteristics as it would in a typical person of the "correct" type, ie, for me Ni behaving as it would be in an ESFP
    The first thing we have to do is make sure we are using correct definitions. Many of those CF tests sort of freelance on the definitions and so often things that have nothing to do with a function get caught up (like people associating creativity with Intuition and nervousness with Si).

    To be an INFP or ISFP means that you are a person who generally defaults to a perspective of judging things against an internal ideal and then seeks to take steps (via Inferior Te) to accomplish those ideals. To be an INFJ is to be a person who appeals to their Intuitions - gut feelings, notions, insights, reading between the lines, looking behind the scenes, etc. So you can see the two types are very different.

    It really doesn't matter what the CF test reports for function usage, the only thing that matters is your dominant/inferior function. In real life it's actually much more difficult to tell whether or not a person's aux is Sensation or Intuition because the level of conscious awareness and development of these functions will vary greatly between individuals. Generally speaking we can say someone is an INFP if they tend to favor their Intuitions over their sensual perceptions as far as information gathering, but because Intuition is not their dominant function we can really not be sure of this. Whereas the dominant/inferior functions relate to the core of who a person is, we can often quickly see what is driving the person (many people mistake Ne for being the driving force of INFPs, probably due to misunderstandings about J/P with MBTI, but in reality INFPs and ISFPs are driven by Fi/Te and in person this is unmistakeable - you might likely not ever confuse a Fi-type for a Ne-type in person, they sort of come from different worlds and might not even really understand each other in real life).

    Just looking at MBTI sorter (the actual instrument not some online test) you should generally expect a real Fi-dom to score really high on F and really low on T (assuming the functions are defined correctly), but understand this doesn't mean the person doesn't think, just that their conscious orientation is toward the evaluating (Feeling). If we get results that look sort of like 80% N, 55% F or something to that effect, that probably tells us the person is not really an INFP but rather an Intuitive (even though it may sort as INFP), the person's real preference is clearly toward Intuition. With a Feeling type we should expect a really high F score, and maybe 50/50 N/S, which makes more sense, but again it all comes down to how well the person knows themselves and how well the test properly defines and sorts the categories just like on a cognitive function test. Also keep in mind, CF test largely measure behaviors and then try to infer function usage from them, which is often very dicey because we may not actually know that a certain behavior or way of going about things is truly Ni or Fe, for instance. You sort of have to take the test author's word for it.
    Donovan, madhatter, JungyesMBTIno and 6 others thanked this post.

  3. #3
    INTP - The Thinkers

    I find one of the CP tests (the older, professionally produced one called Keys 2 Cognition) to be rather accurate as far as the dominant and auxiliary, and those are all you need to identify/sort out one of the 16 types. The other six do not define type by their "strengths"; you would only expect them to be weaker than the dom/aux. How they compare to each other is totally irrelevant.
    The order you see is about the archetypal roles they fit in the type's ego structure, and that doesn't have much to do with strength. As LL said, the test is measuring behaviors, and an unconscious function can produce visible behavior. So the actual function will be low in the stacking order based on roles and consciousness, but may come out high when its behavior is measured by the test

    The other test, where the results almost always come out like Ti > Ni > etc. (And which people here seem to be using more than the other one now) I think lacks some sort of mechanism the other test probably employs to make it more likely the dom and aux will be such that can define a type. That occasionally does still happen on K2C, but much less. So I wouldn't go on that one (my apologies on the member here who created it).
    Of course, I've run across a few who have turned against MBTI and say that there should be any possible order, such as NiTi (leading to 40,320 types!)
    Quote Originally Posted by LiquidLight View Post
    many people mistake Ne for being the driving force of INFPs, probably due to misunderstandings about J/P with MBTI.
    There's also the fact of of being extraverted (more visible than the deep, internal dominant), and also the "parent" function (by which we tend to reach out to assist others).
    Donovan, MilkyWay132, JungyesMBTIno and 2 others thanked this post.

  4. #4
    INTP - The Thinkers

    it means that function tests suck because they measure 8 functions when you actually only have 4, also they assign stuff to the functions that arent really about the functions.
    Owfin, Julia Bell and snowbell thanked this post.

  5. #5
    INTJ - The Scientists

    Yeah, I think one of the easier ways to figure out type in terms of dominant perception or dominant judgement is largely to focus on how much a person focuses on what something is vs. what something isn't, since it is the judging functions that focus on assigning metrics by excluding what something isn't, essentially, while the perceiving functions focus more on how something exists by excluding what something is.
    Astrophe, Julia Bell, snowbell and 1 others thanked this post.

  6. #6
    INFP - The Idealists

    Thank you very much! I'm still confused, though.

    From the responses, it seems that the test needs to be a properly worded and administered test, to bring out the function (and to do so it analyses behavior). This means that behaviours can be provoked by a test causing a function to test higher than it normally would.

    However, If someone is deviating from the typical order, does their inferior function perform in the same manner as it would for someone who is representative of the "typical" order of that function stack?

  7. #7
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Your inferior function is always your inferior function regardless of whatever the test results say. Simply, if you are a Thinking type your Inferior function will be Feeling, if you are a Sensation type it will be intuition and so on. The inferior function doesn't act any differently because it is largely not under conscious control (meaning most of the time you aren't even aware of its existence, let alone able to manipulate it).

    There really is no deviation from the typical order in the way that you propose. People have a dominant function which is countered by an inferior function, and two non-antagonistic functions in the middle. In MBTI style type dynamics lets say you're an INFP. Your first function must be Introverted Feeling and Inferior must be Extraverted Thinking. That is fundamental to Jung's approach to the types. The two middle functions, in type dynamics will always be Ne and Si. That's why I say it is so important to make sure you are taking a test that is properly defining the functions, because as @Naama points out its testing you for eight variables when you really only consciously use four (even in the case of 'shadow functions' the 'usage' of these functions, if you want to call it that, is unconscious, so at best having an odd function order might, in shadow function theory, indicate you are being pulled in uncomfortable ways unconsciously like feeling opposed a lot for instance).

    In short you're not really going to deviate from the typical order, regardless of what the test results are because of Jung's rules about the functions. That the auxiliaries must not be antagonistic to the dominant/inferior functions (meaning no dominant Ti and auxiliary Fi or dominant Ne and auxiliary Se). If your dominant function is perception (and the inferior by extension) the auxiliaries will be judging functions and vice versa.

    There are four functions. Thinking, Feeling, Intuition and Sensation. Four basic ways of processing not eight (the four functions can be expressed in eight ways but there are only four functions) so consciously it has to add up to T,N,S,F or some variation thereof, even if a CF test says you are Fi, Fe, Ne, Si or something whacky that isn't possible. It's either inferring unconscious use of those functions as per the Beebe theory, or just not right.

  8. #8
    ENFP - The Inspirers

    The short answer is that these tests are inadequate. They do a poor job of pinpointing functions. The problem is that any person with a healthy psyche can do or may have experienced the things described in many of the questions. The focus on these tests is improperly placed on what people do and experience and not on how or what it was like. For example, an ISTJ and an ESTP, though having completely different conscious functions, can reach the same conclusion about a situation but how they get there is completely different.
    madhatter, Eric B, MilkyWay132 and 4 others thanked this post.

  9. #9
    INTP - The Thinkers

    Quote Originally Posted by Bumblyjack View Post
    The focus on these tests is improperly placed on what people do and experience and not on how or what it was like.
    That's a good point I had thought of (particularly the "what it was like" part), but forgot if I've ever mentioned it directly. The archetypes will shape what it was like, an if instead of or in addition to the "rarely me ~ mostly me" scale; the choices tied into the archetypes, it would give a better sense of where the functions actually fall in the person's psyche.
    Donovan, madhatter, JungyesMBTIno and 5 others thanked this post.

  10. #10
    INFJ - The Protectors

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    That's a good point I had thought of (particularly the "what it was like" part), but forgot if I've ever mentioned it directly. The archetypes will shape what it was like, an if instead of or in addition to the "rarely me ~ mostly me" scale; the choices tied into the archetypes, it would give a better sense of where the functions actually fall in the person's psyche.
    This is interesting. I never thought of it that way but I think you're onto something. It would most certainly get closer to the core of a person's psyche than the superficialities of the current sorting system (and maybe erase the problem where people feel the Enneagram captures their motivations better).
    Julia Bell and snowbell thanked this post.


 
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. [INTJ] Functional Stack and Type Development:
    By Enfpleasantly in forum INTJ Articles
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-15-2013, 09:45 PM
  2. an instinct stack & attraction question
    By Bumblyjack in forum Enneagram Personality Theory Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-23-2012, 09:25 AM
  3. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 05-07-2012, 01:17 AM
  4. [INFJ] POKEMON: Gotta Catch 'Em A--Ooo I Better Stack Up On MooMoo Milk and Berries
    By ohTOMICho in forum INFJ Forum - The Protectors
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 03-04-2011, 05:19 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-14-2010, 11:09 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:31 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
2014 PersonalityCafe