Personality Cafe banner

Cognitive Functions: New Paradigm

42K views 422 replies 55 participants last post by  reybridge 
#1 · (Edited)
First of all, i am from an engineering background, specifically software engineering, though i am not currently working as one and focus on enjoying life. If you feel like you are logically mature, please put a comment. Well, even if you are not, you can still comment anything positive of course. I just find it a hard time to discuss about cognitive function with people who doesn't use logic and rationality in the first place. I prefer to discuss with logicians who can help me formulate how cognitive functions should be described with firm and consistent premises. It doesn't need to be exactly the same as the definition of Jungian cognitive functions, the important thing is the clarity of the system. Please tell me i am wrong only if you think the system won't work, and not because it is not the same as the original definition as this is supposed to be a new paradigm. Don't get me wrong, the original definition was a great achievement of cognitive functions history that has brought us here.

Well, this is the rules i believe is the fundamental of cognitive functions.

Fundamental

1. Judging Function is a function to change or to create an 'Entity'.
2. Perceiving Function is a function to grasp an 'Entity'.
3. Entity refers to absolutely anything.
3.1. Entity can be 'Physical Entity' or 'Conceptual Entity'.
3.2. No 'Physical Entity' is 'Conceptual Entity', and vice versa.
3.3. Physical Entity is a representation of at least 2 Entities.
3.4. Conceptual Entity is a rule of existence of an Entity.

Extrovert and Introvert

4. Extroverted function is all about 'The World'.
4.1. 'The World' refers to any Entity (see point 3) that is currently perceived by utilizing the sensing organs.
5. Introverted function is all about 'The Mind'.
5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Entity (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by utilizing the sensing organs.
6. Extroverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) to change The World (see point 4.1).
6.1. The only way one changes The World (see point 4.1) is by taking an action, therefore extroverted judging function is always an action.
7. Introverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) to change The Mind (see point 5.1).
7.1. The only way one changes The Mind (see point 5.1) is by 'Burning', therefore introverted judging function is always a 'Burning'.
7.2. Burning is a process to change or to create any Entity (see point 3) in The Mind (see point 5.1).
8. Extroverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp information of The World (see point 4.1).
9. Introverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp information of The Mind (see point 5.1).

Feeling and Thinking

10. Feeling function is a Judging Function (see point 1) to change or to create an Entity (see point 3) with 'Trigger'.
10.1. Therefore, extroverted feeling function is any action with 'Trigger',
10.2. And introverted feeling function is any Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Trigger'.
11. Thinking function is a Judging Function (see point 1) to change or to create an Entity (see point 3) with 'Standard'.
11.1. Therefore, extroverted thinking function is any action with 'Standard',
11.2. And introverted thinking function is a Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Standard'.
12. Standard is an Entity (see point 3) to be (or that has been) deducted logically into another Entity (see point 3).
13. Trigger is an Entity (see point 3) to be (or that has been) inducted into another Entity (see point 3).

Sensing and Intuitive

14. Sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp Physical Entities (see point 3.3).
14.1. Therefore, extroverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp Physical Entities (see point 3.3) from The World (see point 4.1),
14.2. And introverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp Physical Entities (see point 3.3) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
15. Intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp Conceptual Entities (see point 3.4).
15.1. Therefore, extroverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp Conceptual Entities (see point 3.4) from The World (see point 4.1),
15.2. And introverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) to grasp Conceptual Entities (see point 3.4) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
16. How one deciphers an Entity into a Physical Entity or a Conceptual Entity is open for discussion and observation.

That is the rule i hold about cognitive functions. If something is wrong or something is missing, let's discuss it.

Remarkable Edit History:

Sunday, September 19, 2021
Object -> Entity (Suggested by @BigApplePi)
Gather -> Grasp (Suggested by @BigApplePi)
3.3. Physical Entity is representation of connected Entities. -> 3.3. Physical Entity is a representation of at least 2 attached Entities. (By myself)
3.4. Conceptual Object is the connection between Objects. -> 3.4. Conceptual Entity is a rule of existence of an Entity. (By myself)
5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Entity (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by the sensing organs. -> 5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Entity (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by utilizing the sensing organs. (By myself)

Wednesday, December 15, 2021
4.1. 'The World' refers to any Entity (see point 3) that is currently perceived by the sensing organs. -> 4.1. 'The World' refers to any Entity (see point 3) that is currently perceived by utilizing the sensing organs. (By myself)
12. Standard is an Entity (see point 3) to be (or that has been) deducted logically into another Entity (see point 3). Some people may call it a premise. -> 12. Standard is an Entity (see point 3) to be (or that has been) deducted logically into another Entity (see point 3). (By myself)
16. How one deciphers an Entity into a Physical Entity or a Conceptual Entity is unknown. -> 16. How one deciphers an Entity into a Physical Entity or a Conceptual Entity is open for discussion and observation. (By myself)
 
See less See more
#79 · (Edited)
To make them short, this is the very rule of cognitive functions i learned:

Fundamental
Let's put these in logical order.

3. Object refers to absolutely anything.
3.1. Object can be 'Physical Object' or 'Conceptual Object'.
3.2. No 'Physical Object' is 'Conceptual Object', and vice versa.
1. Judging Function is a function to change or create an 'Object'.
2. Perceiving Function is a function to gather an 'Object'.
Doesn't this read better?
well..

3.3. Physical Object is the representation of connected Objects.
Is this a deduction or a definition? What are these "connected objects? What does "connection" mean and does there have to be one? What about defining this as a unified non-analyzed object?
This is my definition of Physical Object. It works just like an atom. An atom consists of electrons attached to the core. Different connection between the core and the electrons will creates an entirely different object in human sense. Physical Object is an Object consists of other smaller objects that has a collective property of Physical Object. Now that i am thinking about it, there must be a variable in CO and PO that defines whether an object will be physical or conceptual to human perception, much like the spin in an electron. Let's call this variable Sum. PO can't exist on its own, but it always be attached to CO. And in a collective number, if the combination of some PO and CO has an odd number as the total Sum, then the structure will be visible to human sense. And if its Sum is an even number, we will perceive it as a CO. I think this makes sense, but i am not sure about this.
3.4. Conceptual Object is the connection between Objects.
Connection? Isn't an object different from what is connected to it?
Yes, what is the problem?
16. How one deciphers an Object into a Physical Object or a Conceptual Object is unknown.
Perhaps adequate induction can identify a unity and we call this a physical object. A conceptual object would be the perception of a connection aka a relation.

Extrovert and Introvert

4. Extroverted function is all about 'The World'.
4.1. 'The World' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is currently perceived by the sensing organs.
The world is a collection of all those objects?
The World may refers to a chair you are currently sit on, but it may refers to only the foot of the chair you are currently sit on as well. And it may refers to "something that makes someone feels comfortable while he is typing" CO you are currently perceiving. Anything you are currently perceiving is The World.

5. Introverted function is all about 'The Mind'.

5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by the sensing organs.
So the mind is everything else.
Right.

6. Extroverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes The World (see point 4.1).
This is a definition.
6.1. The only way one changes The World (see point 4.1) is by taking an action, therefore extroverted judging function is always an action.
Definitional?
Seems so.

7. Introverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes The Mind (see point 5.1).
Order change.
7.2. Burning is a process to change or create any Object (see point 3) in The Mind (see point 5.1).
7.1. The only way one changes The Mind (see point 5.1) is by 'Burning', therefore introverted judging function is always a 'Burning'.
Interesting word, "burning."


8. Extroverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers information of The World (see point 4.1).
9. Introverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers information of The Mind (see point 5.1).

Feeling and Thinking

10. Feeling function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes or creates an Object (see point 3) with 'Trigger'.
The body possesses this "trigger" you must mean.
What do you mean?

10.1. Therefore, extroverted feeling function is any action with 'Trigger',
10.2. And introverted feeling function is any Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Trigger'.

Ordering correction:
12. Standard is an Object (see point 3) to be (or that has been) deducted logically into another Object (see point 3). Some people may call it a premise. <-- Touche!
Is a "standard" the same as a premise? I guess so.
Yes
13. Trigger is an Object (see point 3) to be (or that has been) inducted into another Object (see point 3).
Sounds good, but I'd like to see recognize this is layman's language.
11. Thinking function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes or creates an Object (see point 3) with 'Standard'.
11.1. Therefore, extroverted thinking function is any action with 'Standard',
11.2. And introverted thinking function is a Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Standard'.


Sensing and Intuitive

14. Sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3).
14.1. Therefore, extroverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3) from The World (see point 4.1),
14.2. And introverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
15. Intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4).
15.1. Therefore, extroverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4) from The World (see point 4.1),
15.2. And introverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4) from The Mind (see point 5.1).

That is the rule i hold about cognitive functions. If something is wrong or something is missing, let's discuss it.
You declined a link, so I will copy what I once wrote elsewhere, just for fun:
"Fi is used to maintain life. It informs what is important to us.
Fe is used to get along with other life forms. It supports.

Se observes the environment as it immediately is.
Si observes the environment compared to what it has been.

Ne looks for environmental patterns.
Ni looks for personal patterns.

Te is used to order external environments.
Ti is used to order personal environments.

Four of these CFs are conscious serially; the other four remain unconscious as long as the top four maintain priority. How does this work? That remains to be seen."

I suppose this could be translated into what you have proposed, but yours is a more fundamental level but is hard to make deductions from.
I think Fi doesn't inform anything, it judges (changes) something.
By environment, what is it actually mean?
Why would Si function observes the environment? What if someone just remembers something without observing the environment and it is not a pattern since what he remembers is a concrete fact? Is it still Si works?
I would agree with Te and Ti since ordering something will need to be done with some standards.
 
#82 ·
I almost missed your post because my name wasn't referenced. I think you do good work. I see two issues: logic and definitions. I have a little trouble keeping your definitions in my head, but that's me. Your logic should work.

Is this any better?
"Fi is used to maintain life. It informs says what is important to us.
Fe is used to get along with other life forms. It supports.

Se observes the environment (outside world) as it immediately is.
Si observes the environment (inside mind) compared to what it has been.


Ne looks for environmental patterns.
Ni looks for personal patterns.

Te is used to order external environments.
Ti is used to order personal environments.
For Fi, "inform" was probably too strong a word. Is "says" any better? Fi does judge and change, but what is this change? Doesn't it inform or tell the self what the change in judgment is?
By "environment" I mean anything outside and surrounding the observing self, whether the "world" or the "mind."
About Te and Ti. I wrote that post in a different thread before I ever read this thread. When you use the word "standard" I could ask for that to be defined. For example, a standard could be some sort of template to be matched against. I used the word, "order." We could go on and on searching for precise definitions or words but if what has been said in this thread so far is good enough, we have to decide and stop. I avoided using the word, "logic", as being too precise for practical usage of Te and Ti.

We can stick with your language in this thread though. My language just gives a slightly different perspective and could be left out.
====================

Feel free to ignore the below:
I'm having trouble with
3.3. Physical Object is the representation of connected Objects.
and
3.4. Conceptual Object is the connection between Objects.
I see too heavy a leaning in both cases on the word "connection" and I'm disinclined to straighten it out. This is why you are having trouble distinguishing CO from PO.

I like to use the human skin as the dividing line. The world is anything outside. The mind is what is inside. Leave physical objects to what is outside and conceptual objects to what is inside.
 
#86 ·
Actually, i want people in this thread are professional engineers, especially programmers, so we are thinking in the same logical level, i don't care your type. But if you feel like you are pure logical, you can also give a comment. I just find it is time wasting to discuss about cognitive function with people who doesn't use logic in the first place. I want the purest logician who can help me discover how the very core of cognitive functions work with a firm explanation. It doesn't need to be exactly the same as the definition of Jungian cognitive function, the important thing is the clarity of the system. Please tell me i am wrong ONLY if you think the system won't work, and not because it is not the same as the definition. Because i don't care about the definition. If you are the 'see this link' person, please don't comment anything.

To make them short, this is the very rule of cognitive functions i learned:

Fundamental

1. Judging Function is a function to change or create an 'Object'.
2. Perceiving Function is a function to gather an 'Object'.
3. Object refers to absolutely anything.
3.1. Object can be 'Physical Object' or 'Conceptual Object'.
3.2. No 'Physical Object' is 'Conceptual Object', and vice versa.
3.3. Physical Object is the representation of connected Objects.
3.4. Conceptual Object is the connection between Objects.

Extrovert and Introvert

4. Extroverted function is all about 'The World'.
4.1. 'The World' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is currently perceived by the sensing organs.
5. Introverted function is all about 'The Mind'.
5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by the sensing organs.
6. Extroverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes The World (see point 4.1).
6.1. The only way one changes The World (see point 4.1) is by taking an action, therefore extroverted judging function is always an action.
7. Introverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes The Mind (see point 5.1).
7.1. The only way one changes The Mind (see point 5.1) is by 'Burning', therefore introverted judging function is always a 'Burning'.
7.2. Burning is a process to change or create any Object (see point 3) in The Mind (see point 5.1).
8. Extroverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers information of The World (see point 4.1).
9. Introverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers information of The Mind (see point 5.1).

Feeling and Thinking

10. Feeling function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes or creates an Object (see point 3) with 'Trigger'.
10.1. Therefore, extroverted feeling function is any action with 'Trigger',
10.2. And introverted feeling function is any Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Trigger'.
11. Thinking function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes or creates an Object (see point 3) with 'Standard'.
11.1. Therefore, extroverted thinking function is any action with 'Standard',
11.2. And introverted thinking function is a Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Standard'.
12. Standard is an Object (see point 3) to be (or that has been) deducted logically into another Object (see point 3). Some people may call it a premise.
13. Trigger is an Object (see point 3) to be (or that has been) inducted into another Object (see point 3).

Sensing and Intuitive

14. Sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3).
14.1. Therefore, extroverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3) from The World (see point 4.1),
14.2. And introverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
15. Intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4).
15.1. Therefore, extroverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4) from The World (see point 4.1),
15.2. And introverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
16. How one deciphers an Object into a Physical Object or a Conceptual Object is unknown.

That is the rule i hold about cognitive functions. If something is wrong or something is missing, let's discuss it.
lol silly. You are looking for INTELLIGENT people, not T people. T is merely used to do things and can, but doesn't have to be linked to intelligence.

Here is how all of this works:

For irrational leads:

You notice an object in your environment.
You naturally focus on what you prefer to focus on(real data / things vs concepts).
You "perceive" the object for some time.
You pass your judgment(ethical or logical) on it.
You do something with it(or don't).
(the point being that the goals are rational{ ethics / logic } and the methods are irrational{ sensory data / concepts })

For rational leads:

You notice an object in your environment.
You feel a stinging need to do something with it and hence:
You judge the object with either logic or with ethics.
You do something with it(or don't).
Now you review your options in the new situation and compare the new situation with the wanted outcome.
Repeat until you reach the desired outcome.
(the point being that the goals are irrational { sensory data or physical items / concepts } and the methods are rational)
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigApplePi
#87 ·
For irrational leads:

You notice an object in your environment.
You naturally focus on what you prefer to focus on(real data / things vs concepts).
You "perceive" the object for some time.
You pass your judgment(ethical or logical) on it.
You do something with it(or don't).
(the point being that the goals are rational{ ethics / logic } and the methods are irrational{ sensory data / concepts })

For rational leads:

You notice an object in your environment.
You feel a stinging need to do something with it and hence:
You judge the object with either logic or with ethics.
You do something with it(or don't).
Now you review your options in the new situation and compare the new situation with the wanted outcome.
Repeat until you reach the desired outcome.
(the point being that the goals are irrational { sensory data or physical items / concepts } and the methods are rational)
That seems to work, but does it covers all 16 cognitive functions? Has introvert vs extrovert been defined? Rational vs irrational? Sensation vs intuitive?
 
#100 ·
  @reybridge
 
 
Ugh, responding like that is probably considered trolling, so I'll just copypasta something I typed earlier:

 

ninjahitsawal_ said:
Isn't it weird how you can put two elements together and get an entirely new set of chemical properties? But that doesn't happen when you put play-dough and hot air together. What the hell. This is what I mean by "irrational".
Honestly, my mind isn't taken aback by that information.

The main differences can be immediately honed in upon with a sort of "impulse" to use Ti in INFJs, while your mind goes to Te and is like "What the actual fuck...?"

because Te is looking at the objective similarities of "A(sub-1) + B(sub-1) yields homogeneity" <--> "A(sub-2) + B(sub-2) yields heterogeneity".

Ti doesn't do that. I don't think of it as A({sub-1;sub-2}), or B({sub-1;sub-2}), I think of it as A+B, and C+D,

so my mind looks at the logical consistency of separate subjects (subjective, seen from their insides ignoring the outer "connections"),

rather than logically-interconnected (objective, seen from the outside as containing similar logical ramifications)

 
So, I don't see that as "irrational" at all. I just see it as using logic in a subjective way.

This is the trap: "subjective" does not equal "irrational".

You're generating the logical dissimilarity without an impulse to dig into each interaction subjectively, causing a sort of "mindfuck". You default to self-reference (probably a focus on your own confounded reaction, filtered through Fi) and think "irrational, wow",

when that's not the case. It's simply "subjective logic that I don't feel impelled to use, wow".

I experience "mindfucks" when I encounter information that prompts me to look at the explicit "pragmatic" logic. I could easily think, "irrational, wow",

but with my Fe accessing the normative perceptions of what is "irrational"-as-a-colloquial (subjective, inferred), my Fe in and of itself asserts the "trope" of normativity into my mind so I'm like:

, "But, that's Te, and Te isn't irrational."

or in the mind of someone who's unfamiliar with typology, "But, that requires pragmatism, and pragmatism isn't irrational."

 
If it weren't for the norms, your mind might have been more likely to think "But, that's Ti, and that isn't irrational."

But, the norms as they are-- "rationality = objective, explicit"-- your mind will feel justified in saying "Yeah, it's irrational" without even considering it from another angle. Because of social norms, really.

It's a subtle prejudicial influence. Even if the influence didn't exist, however, you might still miss it as an INTJ because your Fe is in a weak position.

 

ninjahitsawal_ said:
And when I say "the world" I am including humans in that. We're not separate from the world. Part of what I was getting at in my first post, when I said "humans are irrational", is that we are a part of this irrational world. Consider this - when you program music notes into a computer, you can tell it to "humanize" to varying degrees, which essentially means to add imperfections.. this is like "let's add some irrationalities to make it more like real life."
I'd say that's-- in terms of music-- "let's add some subjective inferential rationalities (Fi "feels") to make it more like real life."

So no such thought of irrationality occurs because I look at logical consistency of separate subjective systems: "Irrationality vs Rationality", "Subjective vs Objective", "Explicit vs Inferred"....

 

ninjahitsawal_ said:
So I guess I am essentiallydefining rationality as a discretely organized, determinate system (which life itself is not). :confused:
That's essentially saying "Rationality = Te" which, as I outlined, is a bias.
 
#101 ·
  @reybridge
 
 
Ugh, responding like that is probably considered trolling, so I'll just copypasta something I typed earlier:

 
Well, the only one thing allowed to be irrational is the very fundamental of everything, which is the standard model of quantum physic in science for now. Any other things should be deducted from quantum physics or you can create another framework separated from quantum physics and find the connection later. But still, rational understanding must be done by logic. Anything not logical (doesn't have any premise) is irrational. Even the very core of quantum physics is irrational.
 
#107 ·
Since that's not what you want, all I can do is excuse myself or contribute a post in the format you presented, and I have no interest in doing the latter because my logic functions are "Tertiary" or in the "shadow".
 
#112 ·
It doesn't need to be exactly the same as the definition of Jungian cognitive function, the important thing is the clarity of the system. Please tell me i am wrong ONLY if you think the system won't work, and not because it is not the same as the definition. Because i don't care about the definition. If you are the 'see this link' person, please don't comment anything.
First of all, I really like that you have tried to define the functions. It is not an easy task.

Secondly, there are no definitions of the Jungian functions. There are only descriptions.

Thirdly, if your definitions of the functions do not correspond accurately with the Jungian functions, then you will get types that do not exist in reality. (The School of System Socionics made this mistake)

I will comment on the specifics later.
 
#115 ·
Thank you. Yes, there is no solid definition of Jungian function, that is why i created this thread. And this is also why people always debating on cognitive functions.
Just like you said, Jungian function doesn't have definition, so how can my definition correspond accurately with Jung's description? And also, what kind of type actually exist in reality? Types are based on the functions. If the functions themselves don't have a solid definition, they will be ambiguous forever, and people will debating them forever. That is why i said again and again and again, i am kinda tired about this, that there should be one solid definition about cognitive functions so we all can have exactly the same perspective on how cognitive functions work, so discussing types will be much more convenient.
 
#113 ·
Extrovert and Introvert

4. Extroverted function is all about 'The World'.
4.1. 'The World' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is currently perceived by the sensing organs.
5. Introverted function is all about 'The Mind'.
5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by the sensing organs.
Do mean that your Ne is not being used if you are not currently using your sensing organs?
 
#114 · (Edited)
I am proud that someone actually understand it. Yes, Ne function only runs when you are using your sensing organs. This will differentiates Ne with Ni perfectly. The fact that you use sensing organs to perceive something doesn't justify what kind of object you perceive, it could be either Physical Object or Conceptual Object.
 
#116 ·
Actually, I want people in this thread are professional engineers, especially programmers, so we are thinking on the same logical level, I don't care your type. But if you feel like you are purely logical, you can also give a comment. I just find it is time wasting to discuss cognitive function with people who doesn't use logic in the first place. I want the purest logician who can help me discover how the very core of cognitive functions works with a firm explanation. It doesn't need to be exactly the same as the definition of the Jungian cognitive function, the important thing is the clarity of the system. Please tell me I am wrong ONLY if you think the system won't work, and not because it is not the same as the definition. Because I don't care about the definition. If you are the 'see this link' person, please don't comment anything.

To make them short, this is the very rule of cognitive functions I learned:

Fundamental

1. Judging Function is a function to change or create an 'Object'.
2. Perceiving Function is a function to gather an 'Object'.
3. Object refers to absolutely anything.
3.1. The object can be 'Physical Object' or 'Conceptual Object'.
3.2. No 'Physical Object' is 'Conceptual Object', and vice versa.
3.3. Physical Object is the representation of connected Objects.
3.4. Conceptual Object is the connection between Objects.

Extrovert and Introvert

4. The extroverted function is all about 'The World'.
4.1. 'The World' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is currently perceived by the sensing organs.
5. The introverted function is all about 'The Mind'.
5.1. 'The Mind' refers to any Object (see point 3) that is not currently perceived by the sensing organs.
6. Extroverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes The World (see point 4.1).
6.1. The only way one changes The World (see point 4.1) is by taking an action, therefore extroverted judging function is always an action.
7. Introverted judging function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes The Mind (see point 5.1).
7.1. The only way one changes The Mind (see point 5.1) is by 'Burning', therefore introverted judging function is always a 'Burning'.
7.2. Burning is a process to change or create any Object (see point 3) in The Mind (see point 5.1).
8. Extroverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers information from The World (see point 4.1).
9. Introverted perceiving function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers information of The Mind (see point 5.1).

Feeling and Thinking

10. Feeling function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes or creates an Object (see point 3) with 'Trigger'.
10.1. Therefore, extroverted feeling function is any action with 'Trigger',
10.2. And the introverted feeling function is any Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Trigger'.
11. Thinking function is a Judging Function (see point 1) that changes or creates an Object (see point 3) with 'Standard'.
11.1. Therefore, extroverted thinking function is any action with 'Standard',
11.2. And introverted thinking function is a Burning (see point 7.2) with 'Standard'.
12. Standard is an Object (see point 3) to be (or that has been) deducted logically into another Object (see point 3). Some people may call it a premise.
13. The trigger is an Object (see point 3) to be (or that has been) inducted into another Object (see point 3).

Sensing and Intuitive

14. Sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3).
14.1. Therefore, extroverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3) from The World (see point 4.1),
14.2. And introverted sensing function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Physical Objects (see point 3.3) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
15. The intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4).
15.1. Therefore, extroverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4) from The World (see point 4.1),
15.2. And the introverted intuitive function is a Perceiving Function (see point 2) that gathers Conceptual Objects (see point 3.4) from The Mind (see point 5.1).
16. How one deciphers an Object into a Physical Object or a Conceptual Object is unknown.

That is the rule I hold about cognitive functions. If something is wrong or something is missing, let's discuss it.
I have a few questions

1.What do you mean by "Pure logic"?
2.Why on earth do you believe you need Engineers to answer this question. This has absolutely nothing to do with Engineering, its psychology
3.This sounds similar to other descriptions of the fuctions I have seen elsewhere
 
  • Like
Reactions: Clayfighter
#117 ·
I have a few questions

1.What do you mean by "Pure logic"?
I think hes trying to tell us we can only use logic, because anything else wouldnt make sense lol. logic can be invalid or not sound.

"pure logic" is basically gibberish unless he was referring to its use quantitatively in conversation. I thought it was funny too and was about to ask the same thing lol....

Do I need a Phd to join this elite thread? Or do I only have to go into serious mode and not make careless posts?
 
#121 ·
Im not going to try and comment extensively on your logic so I dont offend you by being inadequate on some level, but you might want to consider restructuring in order to make the base format of the personality types easier to organize and prove in dichotomies. Taking Judging and perceiving out of the mix would allow each type to have a different order to the functions, which would make it less likely to be invalid due to some exception of the rule and leave less room for the possibility of "mixed types." It would probably be best to avoid any uncertainty altogether to avoid inconsistencies down the road in types.

It almost looked like you started with J and P though for how we interact or gather from our environment or internal thoughts. while its true we start by gathering information, we start with energy being created through stimuli in order to provoke us to gain the information and follow up.

I and E would be defined as energy flowing from a state of inwardness or self, and E would be energy levels increasing from outside experience.

From there I would categorize people as observing or interacting, basically the difference between how one learns from the environment, by physical interaction(kind of like sensing) or by observing at a distance. The beauty of these two functions is that it allows for subtypes which might be akin to N and S, but the real importance comes from the fact that observing(detaching) and interacting is that they are both behaviors we can observe, and you cannot do anything other than observe or interact when it comes to how you form perceptions, regardless of whether you're thinking, using intuition, or sensing.

You would then execute data based on your values and ideals which drive as the feeling function or thinking which is structure and analysis.

You can keep splitting up the types, just as long as the Hierarchy is simple and valid at its core. It would be easier I think to restructure the subtype formatting than to redo the entire theory because on a problem with terms down the road. I could see how someone might try and say they lead with something other than a perceiving function, but I dont think that's the case I think you start perceiving when you are born and it cycles back and forth as you acquire data.
 
#129 ·
No, the current order of each type already make sense. This thread define each cognitive function, but this doesn't define types. You can say that Pi will always be in pair with Je and Pe with Ji, but it is another discussion. And that rule doesn't conflict with first post rule set at all. It support my definition instead. And i myself likes the current order of functions in types. For example, Te in my definition is any action to change the world with standard. Where does the standard come from in the first place? It comes from Fi function which creates the foundation in the mind. This explains why Te always be in pair with Fi. The same thing happens to other function pairs.

Is "observing and interacting" your definition of Ne and Se? Ne observes and Se interacts? Well, this kinda makes sense to me. But, you need to define "interacting" more detail, because when people chit-chats, i will say they are interacting, which you consider Se. Furthermore, how about Si vs Ni?

As i said, my definition doesn't need types to be restructured. No conflict there. Why do you think my definition needs new type structure? Maybe you are right that everyone started their life by perceiving functions. And maybe this is the reason why kids are playful. But as they get older, they will be able to use judging functions. Just because someone started with perceiving function, doesn't mean he uses perceiving function the most often. So, what is significant here?
 
#122 ·
The point im trying to make with my definitions on this post, is I think terms like introverted and extroverted perception seem to be almost misleading, because a perception can be made in so many different ways and its really a category that is intended to reference a perceiving function not necessarily be its own function, the dichotomy becomes so vague that almost 100% of the population are going to use both introverted and extroverted perception equally.... and I dont think it would make sense to say we either perceive our mind or the world as an attitude or a preference, or even as a separate form of perception. cognitive functions like metacognition are simply an unrelated form of self-correction which is not utilized as an opposing format to perceiving the world but rather for its own purpose entirely which is utilized regardless of how you process everything else.

And it wouldnt even be a perception, if you perceived a fact from the world and then executed with a thinking function, how would you perceive it inwardly, or notice an error with the same perceptive function? It would be more a thinking function or judging process which would be introspective in this conscious way. Perceiving is more unconscious than anything.

The reason I say this is all thoughts are abstract, it requires some form of execution to make sense of them in order to understand your own mind.
 
#124 ·
Not to nitpick, but I would not say that judging creates or changes an object. I would rather say that it draws the distinctions between opposites and applies intuition in a way that the object is ascertained. This allows for categorization. This facilitates change, but the change does not lie in the act of judging itself.

Also, sensing cannot gather objects without certain intuitions preexisting. I wouldn't say that this makes your definition wrong, but an understanding of the a priori cognitions which exist always within our mind and make the world perceivable to us is vital here. Without this understanding, the claim becomes that sensing can ascertain objects alone, which is false.
 
#126 ·
Cognitive functions are an abstract construct made by Jung.
It only works the way he described it.
It is very simple too.

I have often been asked, almost accusingly, why I speak of four functions and not of more or fewer.
That there are exactly four was a result I arrived at on purely empirical grounds. But as the following consideration will show,
these four together produce a kind of totality. Sensation establishes what is actually present,
thinking enables us to recognize its meaning, feeling tells us its value,
and intuition points to possibilities as to whence it came and whither it is going in a given situation.
In this way we can orient ourselves with respect to the immediate world as completely as when we locate a place geographically by latitude and longitude.



Carl Jung
End of discussion.
If you don't like it make your own typology.
 
#128 ·
Cognitive functions are an abstract construct made by Jung.
It only works the way he described it.
It is very simple too.



End of discussion.
If you don't like it make your own typology.
Looking at your quote, i very easily find inconsistencies. If thinking recognizes meaning and feeling tells value, then whenever we think we also feel. Because how can something has a meaning without value? Or something has a value but doesn't have any meaning? Seriously, don't you an INTJ find that ridiculous?
For intuition and sensing, what if someone perceives a possibility but it is actually present? Is he using S or N function? That is very ambiguous.
 
#140 ·
So far I'm not impressed by the way Socionics is presented. Links which present the kitchen sink are not focused or logical. I'm seen many references to this "Model A" which did not focus. Then I saw a reference to a "Model D." Immediately I asked myself, what happened to Models B and C? are they relevant? Talking pure quality without a starting point of clarity leaves me coldish.

I understand something of cognitive functions with the MBTI. Who wishes to approach that kind of clarity with Socionics? If Socionics is being talked about rather than the MBTI, can that be said?

That's my general impression so far as a novice to Socionics.
 
#146 ·
I got bored for a spell and I have a lot I can say about the functions. And the thought of attempting to be logical was just overbearing, so I wrote the stuff below. It's not really "logical" exactly, but I think it's a fun way to look at the functions. Let me know what you think, folks.

A few basic premises to start with:

We all have brains.
We all have thoughts.
We all have emotions.
We all perceive things.
We all differentiate between one thing and another, using our senses (e.g. the difference between a baseball and a football).
We all have the ability to differentiate between concepts in our minds.


Functions:

(Te) Extroverted Thinking is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed perfection[SUP]1[/SUP] that relies on sensory perception, memories of sensory perception, and imagined sensory perception.

(Ti) Introverted Thinking is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed perfection that relies on conceptual perception[SUP]2[/SUP], memories of conceptual perception, and imagined conceptual perception (ex: math equations).

(Fe) Extroverted Feeling is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed imperfection[SUP]3[/SUP] that relies on sensory perception, memories of sensory perception, and imagined sensory perception.

(Fi) Introverted Feeling is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed imperfection that relies on conceptual perception, memories of conceptual perception, and imagined conceptual perception (ex: moral righteousness).

(Se) Extroverted Sensing is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed solidity[SUP]4[/SUP] that relies on ongoing sense perception and imagined ongoing sense perception (ex: doing parkour for real, or visualizing an action scene).

(Si) Introverted Sensing is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed solidity that relies on stored sense perception and imagined stored sense perception.

(Ne) Extroverted Intuition is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed fluidity[SUP]5[/SUP] that relies on ongoing sense perception and imagined ongoing sense perception.

(Ni) Introverted Intuition is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed fluidity that relies on stored sense perception and imagined stored sense perception.


Footnotes:

1. 'Assumed perfection' means that the analysis and differentiation are done with the assumption of a hypothetically perfect system or world.

2. 'Conceptual perception' refers to any perception that is not based, fundamentally, on sensory data. Rather, it often acts as a sort of overlay for the sensory world; a way to see it more clearly (such as a map).

3. 'Assumed imperfection' means that the analysis and differentiation are done with the assumption of a hypothetically flawed, or imperfect, world.

4. 'Solidity' refers to the assumption that the sensory world is fundamentally unchanging.

5. 'Fluidity' refers to the assumption that the sensory world is fundamentally subject to change, or is based significantly on one's point of view.


Examples of function failure (usually induced by imbalanced/exclusionary use of functions)-
Te: Creates a testable and reasonable-sounding banking system, but doesn't account for human beings running it.
Ti: Creates a model that will get man to Mars in a few days, but it requires tools that we don't have.
Fe: Remains in a damaging relationship because "everyone has flaws anyway."
Fi: Pushes the idea "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them," but doesn't follow it. "Nobody's perfect and I'm no exception."
Se: Skateboards the whole day and loses track of adult responsibilities.
Si: Insists that the flag at the ballpark was orange, when it was objectively red.
Ne: Forgets that reality exists for a few weeks, while fighting the Lost Knights of Camelot.
Ni: Looks into a crystal ball and concludes, "You'll have a bad case of the flu next week."
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigApplePi
#147 ·
Nice layout and descriptions. I have some comments (in blue) so see what you think.
I got bored for a spell and I have a lot I can say about the functions. And the thought of attempting to be logical was just overbearing, so I wrote the stuff below. It's not really "logical" exactly, but I think it's a fun way to look at the functions. Let me know what you think, folks.

A few basic premises to start with:

We all have brains.
We all have thoughts.
We all have emotions.
We all perceive things.
We all differentiate between one thing and another, using our senses (e.g. the difference between a baseball and a football).
We all have the ability to differentiate between concepts in our minds.
I would change "all" to "some of us." (That's a joke.)

Functions:

(Te) Extroverted Thinking is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed perfection[SUP]1[/SUP] that relies on sensory perception, memories of sensory perception, and imagined sensory perception.
I like "concept analysis" but would not assume perfection. I would leave out sensory as intuition is eligible. Example: INTJs.

(Ti) Introverted Thinking is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed perfection that relies on conceptual perception[SUP]2[/SUP], memories of conceptual perception, and imagined conceptual perception (ex: math equations).
ISTPs rely on sensory perception, so concept perception doesn't work universally.


(Fe) Extroverted Feeling is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed imperfection[SUP]3[/SUP] that relies on sensory perception, memories of sensory perception, and imagined sensory perception.

(Fi) Introverted Feeling is concept analysis and concept differentiation of assumed imperfection that relies on conceptual perception, memories of conceptual perception, and imagined conceptual perception (ex: moral righteousness).
Both F's: I can't quite fathom "imperfection." I favor "ordering" (not a great word) for thinking and "evaluation" for feelers. Both ordering and evaluation are choices (judgments) so imperfection is implied.


(Se) Extroverted Sensing is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed solidity[SUP]4[/SUP] that relies on ongoing sense perception and imagined ongoing sense perception (ex: doing parkour for real, or visualizing an action scene).

(Si) Introverted Sensing is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed solidity that relies on stored sense perception and imagined stored sense perception.
Both S's: You use the word, "solidity." You mean sensing is solid? You don't mean motionless, do you? We sense either the unmoving and the moving. I do like the words "ongoing" and "stored." I had used external and internal.


(Ne) Extroverted Intuition is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed fluidity[SUP]5[/SUP] that relies on ongoing sense perception and imagined ongoing sense perception.

(Ni) Introverted Intuition is sensory perception and sensory differentiation of assumed fluidity that relies on stored sense perception and imagined stored sense perception.
Both N's: I don't buy "fluidity." I use particular (not the best word) for sensing and pattern for intuition.


Footnotes:

1. 'Assumed perfection' means that the analysis and differentiation are done with the assumption of a hypothetically perfect system or world.

2. 'Conceptual perception' refers to any perception that is not based, fundamentally, on sensory data. Rather, it often acts as a sort of overlay for the sensory world; a way to see it more clearly (such as a map).

3. 'Assumed imperfection' means that the analysis and differentiation are done with the assumption of a hypothetically flawed, or imperfect, world.

4. 'Solidity' refers to the assumption that the sensory world is fundamentally unchanging.
Disagree unless I missed your meaning.

5. 'Fluidity' refers to the assumption that the sensory world is fundamentally subject to change, or is based significantly on one's point of view.


Examples of function failure (usually induced by imbalanced/exclusionary use of functions)-
Te: Creates a testable and reasonable-sounding banking system, but doesn't account for human beings running it.
Ti: Creates a model that will get man to Mars in a few days, but it requires tools that we don't have.
Fe: Remains in a damaging relationship because "everyone has flaws anyway."
Fi: Pushes the idea "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them," but doesn't follow it. "Nobody's perfect and I'm no exception."
Se: Skateboards the whole day and loses track of adult responsibilities.
Si: Insists that the flag at the ballpark was orange, when it was objectively red.
Ne: Forgets that reality exists for a few weeks, while fighting the Lost Knights of Camelot.
Ni: Looks into a crystal ball and concludes, "You'll have a bad case of the flu next week."
Good examples.
I wrote the below in another thread and include it to see if you think a merger is eligible.
 
We can divide the human psyche into eight functions. Functions can be cognitive, meaning conscious and focused. Functions can be unconscious meaning background and diffuse. This division itself will be "fuzzy" and has to be defined by scientific observation as to clarity.
 
We can start with perceptive versus judgmental functions. Perception is observation. Perception can be divided into specific versus general (S vs N). This roughly translates to sense apprehension versus patterns/ impressions-in-the-large apprehension. Perception is immediate and precedes judgment as judgement must have content to judge.

Judgment gives direction to the perceived. Judgment can be divided into order versus value (T vs F). Order means spacial direction; value means intensity of application. (It is interesting this can be roughly translated into velocity in physics where velocity is direction and speed combined.)

Perception and judgment can further be divided into internal mind versus external world. This roughly translates to introversion vs extroversion but I won't use those words. The external world is the world observable not just to the self but to others, sometimes called the "objectively" viewed world. The internal world is a mapping of the external world observable only within the mind or brain of an individual. (Post #210)
 
  • Like
Reactions: LostFavor
#167 · (Edited)
I really like the idea and I tend to agree with it. We need a solid definition of cognitive functions. People talk so much about it without understanding of how ambiguous it is. Anyone can interpret it any way they want. A concrete definition is needed. That should be fundamental if you want to classify things.

However, we still need a reality check. Does the definition works?

I always see these functions as a collection of operative functions. I made up that term to refer to Pe, Ji, Pi, and Je. For me all cognitive functions (only four! S/N/T/F) can be explained that way. But there's some complication with Ne and Si. With Se/Ni it's easy to stay true to the term "sensory" and "intuition". But Ne/Si works by mixing things up... To explain further, Ne is extraverted, meaning they're oriented toward the external world, and is a perceiving function. But as far as we know, everyone uses sensory organs before they can perceive the world (Pe operation). Thus, the term "Sensing" and "Intuition" maybe not the best usage for this situation. What Jung called sensation is actually closer to extraverted perception. So what is Se and Ne? They're basically two different functions that focus on different type of informations from sensory organs, just like OP said. Then processed by Ti/Fi, triggering some kind of internal world (personal storage? archetypes?), then the result is received/retrieved by Si/Ni, and finally Te/Fe has to be selective which signals needs to be expressed.

Pe and Pi do the same job, except they're working in different directions. Same applies to Je and Ji.

Now, that's not the whole story. There is this kind of phantom sensory organ and motor response. We can recreate any physical stimulus and be pseudo-releasing our motor impulse without actually experiencing/doing it in external world. So, there must be some kind of looping circuit there in our brain. And it's probably caused by the connection to all these operations (Pe, Ji, Pi, Je), which works together to form some kind of RAM/working memory. Is this what creates our conscious mind?

The structure would be like this

---------External World----------
-----------v-----------------^------------
-------sensor-------motor--------
-----------v-----------------^------------
----------Pe--------------Je-----------
-----------v---\--------/---^------------
-----------v----mind-----^------------
-----------v---/--------\---^------------
----------Ji----------------Pi------------
-----------v-----------------^------------
----------- - - - - - - - - - - -------------(unknown)
----------Internal World-----------

I think I would just give some keypoints here...

Pe = radar
Ji = translator
Pi= retriever
Je = expressor

S = object
N = property
T = technical criteria (detached/classification system)
F = ethical criteria (attached/reinforcement system)
 
#170 ·
I have an idea about intuition. What if it's actually dealing with time? Originally, I see it as connection between datas, but if you think about it, connection can be made if and only if there is interval between datas. Even static images need time before being interpreted by eyes. Therefore, I'm thinking...what if Ne is accumulation of emergent datas before being taken in, and Ni is accumulation of retrieved datas?

You can also call it frequency, repetition, etc, but it's something that deals with time.

I realize that my explanation is too vague, though. Would need time before I can see it in flesh.
 
#171 · (Edited)
I really like the idea and I tend to agree with it. We need a solid definition of cognitive functions. People talk so much about it without understanding of how ambiguous it is. Anyone can interpret it any way they want. A concrete definition is needed. That should be fundamental if you want to classify things.

However, we still need a reality check. Does the definition works?

I always see these functions as a collection of operative functions. I made up that term to refer to Pe, Ji, Pi, and Je. For me all cognitive functions (only four! S/N/T/F) can be explained that way. But there's some complication with Ne and Si. With Se/Ni it's easy to stay true to the term "sensory" and "intuition". But Ne/Si works by mixing things up... To explain further, Ne is extraverted, meaning they're oriented toward the external world, and is a perceiving function. But as far as we know, everyone uses sensory organs before they can perceive the world (Pe operation). Thus, the term "Sensing" and "Intuition" maybe not the best usage for this situation. What Jung called sensation is actually closer to extraverted perception. So what is Se and Ne? They're basically two different functions that focus on different type of informations from sensory organs, just like OP said. Then processed by Ti/Fi, triggering some kind of internal world (personal storage? archetypes?), then the result is received/retrieved by Si/Ni, and finally Te/Fe has to be selective which signals needs to be expressed.

Pe and Pi do the same job, except they're working in different directions. Same applies to Je and Ji.

Now, that's not the whole story. There is this kind of phantom sensory organ and motor response. We can recreate any physical stimulus and be pseudo-releasing our motor impulse without actually experiencing/doing it in external world. So, there must be some kind of looping circuit there in our brain. And it's probably caused by the connection to all these operations (Pe, Ji, Pi, Je), which works together to form some kind of RAM/working memory. Is this what creates our conscious mind?

The structure would be like this

---------External World----------
-----------v-----------------^------------
-------sensor-------motor--------
-----------v-----------------^------------
----------Pe--------------Je-----------
-----------v---\--------/---^------------
-----------v----mind-----^------------
-----------v---/--------\---^------------
----------Ji----------------Pi------------
-----------v-----------------^------------
----------- - - - - - - - - - - -------------(unknown)
----------Internal World-----------

I think I would just give some keypoints here...

Pe = radar
Ji = translator
Pi= retriever
Je = expressor

S = object
N = property
T = technical criteria (detached/classification system)
F = ethical criteria (attached/reinforcement system)
How do we know if a definition will work anyway? A definition is a framework. As long as there is no conflicting items within the points in the rule, it is not wrong. And yes, it doesn't mean it is right either. But i believe a framework is better than no framework when we are thinking about anything, and a solid clear framework is better than an ambiguous one.

What makes it hard for you to understand Ne/Si? Yes, Se uses sensory organs for its function, but so does Ne. The word sensory organ doesn't mean it only perceives Physical Objects (see my definition, later will be called PO). A Conceptual Object (CO) can also be perceived through sensory organs, just as mystical as how PO is perceived.

I like your diagram, it is exactly what i want to say. But i think there should be a realm mediating Pe with Ji, and Pi with Je. Is this what you mean by RAM? And i agree, the unknown may be the one responsible to our conscious mind. For precisely, it is the flow of impulses going from the unknown field to the "RAM" field, RAM to unknown, sensor to RAM, or RAM to motor that constructs our consciousness.



Maybe you are right. Connection can not happen without time. I like to think of time as a change of the entropy. I mean, time only exists when there is a change (no matter how small it is) in the universe. Intuition perceives the change happening on a realm, be it in external world or in internal world. A pattern need some differences between its vertexes. But, with this idea, what kind of object is the vertex? Is it a PO? Maybe it can be PO or CO. But it means that there must be at least one PO (the representation) to begin with? Maybe. This is interesting.
 
#173 ·
Yes, of course it has. The definition on the first page is the result of the discussions performed here. You don't need to read page by page, you don't even need to write a comment. You only need to understand the definition and let the others know so we all can have exactly the same perspective on cognitive functions.
 
#182 ·
No you may not. Can't you read? Logical people ONLY! Feeler folk ain't welcome hur.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top