Personality Cafe banner

MBTI functions explained

164K views 89 replies 46 participants last post by  Eric B 
#1 · (Edited)
I found this in this website: http://player2000gi.host-ed.net/jungian_functions.htm and thought I'd share. I found it very concise and elegant:


Our personal world is a complex network made up of countless elements. To make sense of it all, our mind forms a matrix which contains information that has reached our conscious awareness, and which it will use to give meaning to our perceptions. Our motivating force is to maintain the stability and coherence of this structure, and our personality represents the process through which this is achieved. See conclusions for more information.

The matrix is made up of conceptual elements, i.e. physical objects, people, beliefs, etc., that I will simply call objects or events. Whenever it is enhanced, we feel pleasure; if it is damaged, we feel pain. The fundamental purpose of all our choices and actions is to maintain and enhance the stability and coherence of this structure.


The Perceiving Function

To understand the perceiving function, we need to divide objects into two components: physical and motion. The physical component is the object's physical properties- shape, colour, texture, etc., while the motion component describes the dynamic processes associated with the object. Naturally, both exist within our experience, but the idea is that the matrix, the brain's map of reality, is built primarily with just one of the components.

The Sensing reality structure is built with the physical component. For this reason, the Sensor is drawn to the concrete and pragmatic matters of life. He is in touch with the immediate sensory experience and has little interest in idea or theory. The Sensor is obviously aware of the motion component, but within the reality structure, this takes the form of fact, rather than process.

The Intuitive mind is sensitive to the motion component. Even static objects, when integrated into the matrix, must be associated with past experience, and therefore take the form of motion and process. Ideas, theory, and possibilities are then more appealing than facts and actualities. How something works, or what it does, is more important than the thing itself.

Surface appearance is not sufficient to enhance the Intuitive reality structure. The Intuitive must be aware or work out the processes associated with an object or event. Only then can it be connected with past experience and integrated into the matrix. This mental activity often provides intelligence and the ability to understand complex ideas and relationships. Furthermore, as facts per se do not provide security, the Intuitive function brings about an original mind that is always eager to further develop its understanding of reality.

Sensitivity to process means that only Intuition allows us to (i) understand something that we have never before encountered, and (ii) apply our acquired knowledge in an unfamiliar situation. The function is invaluable in the sciences, engineering, philosophy, and any other field that requires us to deal with the abstract or the unknown.

When raised to a human level, the motion component will encompass personality, growth and progress, which are therefore particularly important to the Intuitive. The present condition, individual or collective, depending on the function's orientation, is then an obstacle, a 'thing' to be improved and developed. No wonder that most of history's greatest social reformers and human rights activists have been Intuitives. The Sensor, in contrast, frowns upon unconventional behavior that could bring change to the status quo, preferring instead the security provided by the known and the familiar.

Naturally, extreme perception of either component is unhealthy, giving rise to a person who is closed-minded, materialistic and superficial, or who lives immersed in a world of fantasy and imagination. Also, such an imbalance builds a reality structure that is 'blind' to either one of the components and is therefore particularly vulnerable.


As shown above, the Sensing matrix is built with static objects and their physical properties. Intuition, on the other hand, is aware of motion and process. Sensing and Intuition act in some respects as two opposing forces - the former seeking stability; the latter, change. Thus, the perceiving function has a profound impact on the way we see, understand, and respond to the world.


Introversion / Extraversion

The perceiving function builds the content of the reality structure. The information, however, can be integrated through two distinct processes:

Introversion


The Introvert will focus on particular aspects of the environment and connect perception with highly specific past knowledge. Experience is then integrated within a localized matrix area. Though precise and discriminating, objects are associated and understood within an immediate and limited context. For the Introverted Sensor, the matrix contains specific, detailed and factual information, while an Introverted Intuitive will strive to grasp the principles behind a particular situation.

Introversion is aware of the specific and the literal, but has poor perception of the overall environment. The relationships that are established between our perceptions and the matrix are such that, although we may be aware of their precise meaning, we cannot connect them with our knowledge of the world at large. To maintain a stable reality structure, the Introvert requires a safe environment that provides continuity, familiarity, habit and isolation.

Matrix enhancement through Introversion is a relatively slow analytical process, and the introvert often feels overwhelmed in highly stimulating environments.


Extraversion


Extraversion has global access to the reality structure. This means that it can establish relationships between the perceived information and multiple objects throughout the matrix. A downside to this cognitive process is that, although the perceived information is integrated onto a wide matrix area, it is only sensitive to overall, superficial properties. Extraverted Sensing maintains a matrix based on superficial sense impressions, and Extraverted Intuition is aware of process, pattern, and possibility.

Extraversion is an expansive force that is stimulated by the world at large. While Introversion will focus on specific external objects, only Extraversion can grasp significance within the 'big picture.' It is a fast process, and so the Extravert requires highly stimulating environments to maintain a stable reality structure.

Introverted perception and extraverted perception are located in the left and right brain hemispheres, respectively.

See hemisphere specialization.

Introverted Sensing

Sensory information is incorporated into a localized matrix area. The Introverted Sensor focuses on a specific aspect of an object and establishes highly localized connections to other objects within the matrix. This structure is perhaps the most dependent on a familiar and stable environment.

Extraverted Sensing

Overall sense impressions are integrated onto a wide matrix area. The Extraverted Sensor is acutely aware of the immediate physical environment and how it fits into the larger context. This type enjoys strong sensory stimuli and lives very much in the present.

Introverted Intuition

Dynamic processes are integrated within a highly localized matrix area. Introverted Intuition is mainly interested in the abstract principles that underlie a given event, not in the event itself. For this reason, this function often provides insight and understanding.

Extraverted Intuition

The motion component is integrated onto a wide matrix area. The Extraverted Intuitive will conceptualize process and pattern within the overall picture, and is immediately aware of all the possibilities suggested by a particular situation. The focus is always on future possibilities, rather than the present moment.


The Judging Function
Connections within the matrix are established by the judging function.



The Feeling function ties together our perceptions in a wide, holistic manner, establishing connections between multiple objects throughout the matrix. Any decisions taken by the Feeler must maintain the integrity of these wide, interdependent connections, and not just the immediate structure pertaining to the given situation.

Possibly due to the type of associations that are established, Feeling is concerned with people rather than things, bringing about a moral conscience, a sense of loyalty and responsibility. Feelers give priority to personal values and consider the broader perspective before making any decisions.



Thinking types are critical, impersonal and objective. The Thinking function establishes linear connections based on specific properties. When making decisions, the Thinker only has to maintain the immediate matrix structure that may be affected by any ensuing action. For this reason, this type will disregard all that is not directly related to the decision at hand, and may often appear cold and impersonal. The connections established by this function are highly specific and often provide insight and understanding.

While Feeling is essentially a holistic process that perceives the world as an interconnected web, Thinking is linear, logical and analytical.


The ideas we have discussed above seem to suggest that the judging function has no orientation. There is no Extraverted or Introverted Feeling, just Feeling, period. The dominant and auxiliary functions form part of the same cognitive process, and the characteristics associated with each of the functions arise from their mutual interaction in the unconscious mind.

For example, Introverted Sensing will focus on the details and integrate the perceived information into highly specific and localized areas within the reality structure. Extraverted Thinking can then easily establish linear connections that only span an immediate matrix area, and which are based on concrete and specific facts. For this reason, the Extraverted Thinker is decisive and practical.

Extraverted Sensing, on the other hand, will focus on overall, surface properties, and integrate information onto a wide matrix area. Thinking must then tie together our perceptions of the overall environment, and the Introverted Thinker is then described as detached, introspective, or reflective.

Whether perception or judging is dominant is determined by the primary matrix aspect that maintains stability and coherence, i.e. content or connections, respectively.

Introverted Feeling
This functions will establish holistic relationships spanning a wide matrix area. It gives deep meaning and significance to our perceptions and strives for a sense of harmony in the overall environment. Decisions are then based on personal values and ideals.

Extraverted Feeling
Extraverted Feeling builds a holistic web of connections within a localized matrix area. The function has strong awareness of social structure and may manifest as the drive to organize a family, community, school, etc. Extraverted Feelers are drawn to social institutions where they can bring order, harmony and cooperation.

Introverted Thinking
Introverted Thinking establishes analytical and linear connections between our overall perceptions. It will build a web of specific and direct connections suggested by overall external elements. Introverted Thinkers are therefore not directly interested in the external situation, but rather on any understandings that it may provide.

Extraverted Thinking
Extraverted Thinking establishes linear connections within a localized matrix area. It brings order into specific aspects of life, and for this reason, an Extraverted Thinker will impose structure and order onto a particular organization or institution.


If the dominant and auxiliary form part of the same cognitive process, as is suggested here, then it is reasonable to suppose that they are located in the same brain hemisphere. This would give us the configuration shown below.



The Inferior Function

Each of the matrices has a psychological blind spot, i.e., experiences and thought patterns that cannot be processed through the structure. This is not only responsible for our fears and inferiorities, but creates a constant state of insecurity that most of us try to eliminate through all forms of destructive behavior.

Introverted Sensing types, for example, often have a strong fear of change. With a rudimentary awareness of the motion component, plus an inability to access the overall reality structure, this type can find it impossible to function in an unfamiliar environment. If they lose the routine to which they are accustomed, all sorts of dire possibilities come to mind. Consequently, SJs prefer a world that is cyclical and struggle to keep everything under their control.

Extraverted Sensing types thrive in a homogeneous and stable environment. Like the SJ, they fear losing the familiar, but the threat, for them, comes from the specific. Obsessive, irrational fears often haunt the mind of many SPs. Any localized manifestation of the motion component (i.e. progress, growth, etc.) can terrify the SP, and must be destroyed if an overall sense of stability is to be achieved.

In contrast, Intuitives, who prefer a dynamic environment, may attack authoritarianism (NPs), or people and values that curtail personal freedom, growth and individuality (NJs).

Threatening situations are those that would normally be processed by the person's inferior function. To maintain a safe environment that can be adequately interpreted through the matrix, an individual will develop active defenses through which threatening external objects can be eliminated.



The MBTI types and associated matrices are given below.

Sensing and Feeling


Matrix | component | enhacement | connections
Si Fe .... Physical ......... Local ........... Holistic
Se Fi .... Physical ......... Wide ........... Holistic

http://i260.photobucket.com/albums/ii25/thesunawakens/7.gif
Sensing and Thinking



Matrix | component | enhacement | connections
Si Te .... Physical ......... Local ........... Linear
Se Ti .... Physical ......... Wide ........... Linear


Intuition and Feeling



Matrix | component | enhacement | connections
Ni Fe .... Motion ......... Local ........... Holistic
Ne Fi .... Motion ......... Wide ........... Holistic

Intuition and Thinking



Matrix | component | enhacement | connections
Ni Te .... Motion ......... Local ........... Linear
Ne Ti .... Motion ......... Wide ........... Linear
 
See less See more
10
#2 · (Edited)

Introverted Sensor They work on the specific and the detailed. Seek to be thoroughly aware of all facts before coming to decisions. Not open to new understandings, they are comfortable within tradition and the established. They enjoy being in control and well prepared for whatever life may bring.



Extraverted Sensor They are active and crave new experiences. In touch with the immediate physical reality, they enjoy a fast changing environment. Strongly materialistic, they require strong sensory experience.



Introverted Feeler Considerate, helpful and often introspective, they strive for a sense of harmony and well-being. With strong inner feelings, they are loyal and caring. They follow deep personal convictions rather than social values, making them appear somewhat original and unconventional.



Extraverted Feeler They expect cooperation and harmony within a particular institution. They follow well defined rules of conduct and respect the social hierarchy. They are loyal and may fight for a cause, but always within tradition and accepted norms.



Introverted Thinker Enjoy coming to new understandings, problem-solving and logic. Independent, skeptical and critical. Appear self-absorbed while they use step-by-step logic to discover the principles and connections that underlie the overall picture.



Extraverted Thinker They organize, dictate and control. Easily come to decisions as they set out logical plans of action, or impart rules and regulations. They may rise to a position of authority that allows them to maintain order and efficiency within a given organization.



Introverted Intuitive They are stimulated by problems and enjoy an intellectual challenge and coming to new understandings. They possess an abstract and analytical mind that helps them to discover the underlying principles behind a particular situation. Intensely individualistic, they can walk the road less travelled.



Extraverted Intuitive The most open-minded of the types, they are fascinated by the new. Impulsive, adventurous, and creative, their minds entertain future plans and new ideas. They do not live in the immediate physical reality, but in a world of relationships and possibilities. They abhor routine.

We do not experience reality directly. Instead, we interpret all incoming stimuli through a preexisting matrix which in turn generates our entire world view. Our personality is a set of traits necessary to maintain the integrity of this structure, and ultimately derives from the processes that form and elaborate our concept of reality.


Brain Hemisphere Specialization (my webspace)
Conclusions Further ideas about personality and fear (my webspace)
© Copyright 2000-2005, Mark Bruzon. All rights reserved.
 
#6 ·
I once envisaged comparable symbols to signify cognitive processes. Very nice.
 
#7 ·
So going by your descriptions an ISFP would be a combination of:


Introverted Sensor They work on the specific and the detailed. Seek to be thoroughly aware of all facts before coming to decisions. Not open to new understandings, they are comfortable within tradition and the established. They enjoy being in control and well prepared for whatever life may bring.


Introverted Feeler Considerate, helpful and often introspective, they strive for a sense of harmony and well-being. With strong inner feelings, they are loyal and caring. They follow deep personal convictions rather than social values, making them appear somewhat original and unconventional.

Is that right?
 
#9 ·
That's incorrect, cardinalfire. Although ISFPs use Introverted Feeling (Fi), what Introverted Sensor stands for is Si there, not Se (Extroverted Sensing), I believe. I may be wrong, though. Either way, I would say Extroverted Sensor reflects Se, the ISFP's function, moreso than the Introverted Sensor.
could you put that in basic terms?

I'm still getting the hang of this.
 
#12 ·
I disagree in so many aspects of this theory i don't even know where to begin with.
The fact that sensing is physical and intuition motion, doesn't have any argumentation to back it up. Also Si does involve comparing to the past, which would mean this is also motion... it is extremely confusing comparing physical and motion in this way, it is illogical to do so.
Also the fact that introversion has a tendency to concentrate and extroversion to expand, would mean that the introverted has an initial wider matrix, and extroversion local.
I also disregard the fact that there isn't extroverted or introverted feeling/thinking. I guess this is the part i disagree most with. i believe there is a vital difference between using Ne-Ti and Ti-Ne; the order is definite, Ne-Ti would expand from local matrix then analyze linearly as it expands, thus gaining and accumulating knowledge and finding new meanings; while Ti-Ne would contract wide matrix and increase relationships between knowledge to conform concise understanding, thus becoming wiser and competent in their initial field of concentration .
 
#20 ·
This thread is interesting and useful, but I think the writing in the article exemplifies the trouble I still have in understanding Myers-Briggs. I need examples of a actual behaviors and anecdotes. I am a more narrative thinker. The organization above is a start, but it's too amorphous for me. I need context to root it in. For each instance, I need an example.

Does anyone have examples?

Thank you.
 
#22 ·
I just came to the function area for some basic story on my favourite functions. why isn't that enough for everyone? there is no need to wrap MBTI up in pseudoscience. it's good enough as it is and it's place is not in science. so no use trying to make theories centering on it. I know I'm not making much sense but I want to give you guys one thing. the article that started it, gave itself away when the right brain left brain image came into view. it's not worth much.
 
#24 · (Edited)
OK, here is another way to view functions, that should really bring them to life, in part from the way someone explained them to me. Even better and more in depth than the "perspective" designation!

The functions represent the different ways the emotions are brought into relationship with our higher mental operations. Every person goes though life having to process both concrete and abstract information, and then make both impersonal (logical) and personal (value) judgments. Where our type theory begins; and the whole key to it, is in the way this processing affects us emotionally. The functions are differentiated when a greater value is given to those choices where emotion and reason are in synch. When we use a function that is destined to become "preferred", we feel an emotional investment in what we're doing, and we feel in control of our emotional life, so we keep on doing it. We tend to be more stimulated by the function. It then appears to "develop" or get "stronger", and behaviors associated with it will increase.

This is pivotal to understanding the concepts, as many become confused in their or others' types from looking at behaviors, thinking "such-and-such type can't do that", or "He does such and such too much to be this type".

We all can see, hear touch, taste etc. But only some will have more of an emotional investment in that process, where it becomes "preferred". What is seen right before them is more important as data. To others, the information gained from it will be less relevant.

We all can recognize likely possibilities from situations. But only some will gain the emotional investment from that process, and it will be those who saw the plain, concrete data as less relevent. There must be more to what is seen before you.

Here now, we can really clear things up regarding emotions, since this often gets mixed up with one of the functions.
We all have emotions and like and choose things based on likes and dislikes. Yet only some will have an emotional investment in emotions for their own sake, and specifically prefer to make their decisions accordingly.

We all can see impersonal cause-and-effect relationships in objects and situations, and make decisions accordingly to them. Yet only some will have an emotional investment in this process. Emotion for its own sake will be seen as almost nonsensical.

When functions are undifferentiated, It's not really the functions themselves that are suppressed, and merely waiting for us to "develop" skills associated with them. They simply remain tied to the emotional responses to life, as mobilized by the dominant function.
In other words, for the type preferring concrete data, any immediate abstractions of this data implied will simply support the emotional investment the person has in that concrete data. For the person who prefers impersonal criteria for decisions, the value he places on them will support his Thinking, rather than being a differentiated "Feeling" process.

So types for whom Si is not a conscious function (such as NJ's), will be able to remember things like anyone else; yet they will tend to see the past as less relevant than the Si-preferring SJ's (who will likely demand everything they are involved with be familiar to them). So when they are remembering something, they are not necessarily "using Si". As a primary perspective carrying an emotional investment, it is normally outside the consciousness.
Likewise; with me, I'm usually so busy looking at something for the concepts I associate it with or extract from it; I do not "see" everything that is there.
While I can actually see as good as any SP type, still, the attention is clearly focused elsewhere. I always gained more of an emotional high from pondering meanings, so just looking at something for nothing more than it being there just leaves a very "boring" or "incomplete" feeling. The Se perspective ends up less relevant (until I find I have missed something important, or are called to remember certain details of what was there).

An SJ type we would expect to also not be good at seeing what is there, because they only operate off of stored data. But to the contrary, because they need to take in current data in order to have something to store, they too will likely be better at just seeing what is there for what it is. Hence, we can describe one single "S" function, that deals in sensory data, regardless of whether it is oriented inward or outward. However, what will happen with them is that the purpose of taking in the new information will be to create such a storehouse to draw from, and taking in new experience just for its own sake will be seen as less relevent (if not overly risky). To the SP type, a storehouse will be less relevent. Just deal with the new experience as it comes. (This further illustrates the difference between the J and P attitude).

This focus on emotions should also make the concept of the archetypes easier to understand; like the function themselves; they and their differentiation are forms of emotional reactions.
 
#25 ·
There are so many different experts with so many different ways of putting things, that there ends up being a lot of miscommunication. I'm particularly thinking of the definitions of i/e and T/F.

The internal or external orientation of a function is often portrayed in terms of where the function is "used" ("applied"), or even where its energy "flows", yet on the other hand, some will insist it is the standard of reference of the function. Then this will often be framed in terms of "individual" (personal) versus "agreed upon" or "group" standards, or the orientation being inherent in the objects/subjects in question.

All of these are interpretations of Jung's "focused on the subject [or] object".

Sensing and iNtuition are widely recognized as dealing with concrete vs abstract information. So there is not as much problem defining these.

It's T/F where a lot of problems and type confusion occur. Thinking is widely defined as "logic" and "impersonal". Yet for Feeling, we hear about "values", "ethics", "personal", "harmony", "empathy/sympathy" (and questions as to which attitude carries which), and "emotions/emoting".
This is where descriptions of that function get really screwed up.
Especially regarding emotions.

I myself had been tossed around with these descriptions, and would often use one or another in my discussions. Like the dispute I used to have here with Sim, over the notion of "internal or external application", versus "standard". Or we'll differ on which of the various terms for "Feeling" apply. (Like in an email recently, I spoke of "emotion", and I was told "personal" experential identification, instead).
These terms are basically attempts at concise definitions. But what we need are the most elemental root definitions we can find.

All these terms stick because they all do have at least some truth to them. But since, as we see, the various factors can sometimes span different dichotomies or be common to people of all types, it can often lead to outright contradictions.

Also, it seems some are really more behavioral results than elemental definitions. And I can see (as some complain at times) that the problems in typology often result from overusing behavioral concepts. They do basically match the concepts, but can vary.
This is what often leads to the "Forer effect" I have often been mentioning. For instance, everyone has emotions, and "knows what they want for themselves", not just Feelers in general or introverted Feelers.

I have found Lenore Thomson's definitions to seem more solid (she's one major source for the "standard" and "personal/impersonal" definitions), and so decided to get these from the book:

Perception encourages us to process sensory impressions as they occur
Judgment prompts us to organize our sense impressions by focusing on the ones that happen regularly enough to recognize and predict. (p253)

Left brain (J=Je/Pi) linear one-at-a-time approach to life
Right brain (P=Pe/Ji) wholistic[sic] all-at-once approach to life

It is noteworthy that another person, Mark Bruzon, has T=linear, F=holistic. (Fundamental Nature of the MBTI) This would work the same way as "objective/subjective", which can apply to either e/i or T/F. The factor applies to both, but in different aspects.

The other three dichotomies:

i internal standard
e external standard

S concrete
N abstract

T impersonal
F personal
 
#26 ·
Descriptions from the chapters on the functions:

Te: shared qualities objects have in common used as a standard of sequential order
Ti: the variables [essential dynamics] in a situation related to our intended effect (this probably refers to personal "frameworks", such as particular symmetries one looks for in things)
Fe: measure our options for relationships against an external standard of behaviors
Fi: encourages a personal relationship to an evolving pattern (e.g. how a given situation would affect the person)

To make Ti and Fi parallel Te and Fe more closely:

Ti: essential qualities objects have, chosen as a standard of universal truth
Fi: personal relationship to situations chosen an internal standard of truth

While "relationships" are mentioned only for the two Feeling attitudes, really, all four judging attitudes are dealing with "relationships". The Feeling attitudes deal with "relationships" between people (which includes the subject, of course), and the Thinking attitudes deal with relationships between objects (including treating one's self and others as objects).

Personal/impersonal would also explain Bruzon's T=linear; F=holistic definition. Impersonal relationships are linear, basically "if this, then that". Personal relationships are a more fuzzy category, that looks at each point's [Bruzon does his representations as point matrices] relationship to it environment, rather than a hard line connecting it to the next point. Hence, "holistic".

So we can see right here why Feeling would also be tagged as "subjective" while Thinking is "objective".
At the same time, the external attitude relates to an external object, while the internal attitude relates to the subject.

So to rephrase the functions in terms of their base elements:

Te: judges relationships between impersonal objects according to an external standard (in the objects themselves)
Ti: judges relationships between impersonal objects according to an internal standard (the subject's chosen frameworks)
Fe: judges personal relationships by an external standard (agreed upon behaviors)
Fi: judges personal relationships by an internal standard (experiential identification)

Of course, for the perception functions:

Se: perceives concrete data from an external (emergent) source
Si: perceives concrete data from an internal (stored) source
Ne: abstracts external, emergent data
Ni: abstracts internally stored data

So while we still can never be absolutely sure of other people's types (especially celebrities, who we don't know, and of course, fictional characters), still, to get a good estimation of T/F, we can look at what we can look at what we can call, the
rational focus: personal vs impersonal.

(And perception I would call "perceptive focus: concrete vs abstract")

So hope we can keep these in mind and they can be helpful when thinking of which function is which.
 
#27 ·
Continuing to expand upon this, undifferentiated functions can be described in terms of elements that carry a "sense of meaning" when brought into consciousness by the ego, and when not conscious, come out as felt reactions.

To get an idea of the functions as senses of meaning, first, we should look at the root definitions of the functions I have been highlighting recently:

Se: focus on emergent facts/experience
Si: focus on stored facts/experience
Ne: focus on emergent meanings/patterns
Ni: focus on stored meanings/patterns
Te: focus on set standard of technicality
Ti: focus on variable essence of technicality
Fe: focus on set standard of humanity
Fi: focus on variable essence of humanity

We take in and process these elements continuously, but for each type, according to this theory, only one will be our main outlook in life. The others will either come and go inasmuch as they align with that main outlook, or be more tied to emotions (hence, the premise of the topic) and affect our reactions, or they will align with the archetypes of functional development which form complexes. There are actually hundreds of complexes, but for typological purposes, the eight often mentioned here are those representing how the ego (which is itself a complex; the "main" one of consciousness, of course) experiences other complexes in relationship to the structure it sets up to manage the information allowed into or barred from awareness.

So for examples of this, my main perspective in life is what makes sense, which is a technical focus with an internal standard of analysis using variables that form essential dynamics of how things work. Linear if-then "principles" in decisions, as well.

A focus on emergent patterns and meanings accompany this, and provide the variables in situations in light of my intended effect. This then hooks up with a parental archetype, that becomes personalized as a complex of helping others understand patterns in the form of shared ideas. In Jung's terminology, only the dominant function is "differentiated". Yet, since the parent archetype and it's associated function are prominent, it basically acts like it is differentiated. It is frequently "used" by the ego to fill the role of that complex. So is the tertiary, actually, for a matured person. And at midlife, the inferior also fits its archetypal role more often.

What we call function "development" is likely the increased awareness of the complexes in our consciousness. It's not the undifferentiated "neutral" form of the function that we choose to "develop" through "skills" increased by doing more activities associated with it.
I believe the remaining functions; the "shadows" don't "develop". The most we can do is own the complexes in ourselves that they align with. Outside the complexes, they will just continue to be connected with our emotions.

I should also reiterate from this viewpoint, that undifferentiated functions are not "gears" we shift from one to the other. I don't say "OK, I'm analyzing a symmetry here, so I must 'use' Ti, and now, I should place a personal value in it, so I must 'use' Fi, and I need to see the symmetrical object in the first place, so I have to 'use' Se, and I want to organize something I'm building that way, so I have to 'use' Te". Ti is the main perspective, and those acts associated with the other functions are called functional "products", but those functions themselves are not really differentiated as such like Ti is.

This is what clears up the problem I always saw in speaking of "using" all the other functions. We use their products as they fit our ego's goals, or tie into our emotional reactions.
The closest they come to a quasi-'differentiated' state is when they align with the archetypal complexes, and (beyond the parent/aux, child/tert. and inferior) that is temporary, and usually reactionary. So as I've said before, we don't have to speculate ourselves as being in "oppositional", "witch", "trickster" or "demon" mode when "using" the shadow functions. (And even Beebe acknowledges this).
 
#28 ·
Here's an example of the "sense of meaning" concept:

The "meaning" the type models have for me (as a TP) is a symmetrical categorization system that makes people's behavior make more sense, and for the FP, it will be seen more as a self-improvement tool, and for the FJ, it's good for people to learn to get along better (or for my wife, a counseling tool), and for the TJ, it's a good "team-building" tool for the company.
But of course, I could see those other three meanings as well, and even use them to convince others of the value of the system, (even though my purpose for popularizing it is that it is a symmetry I like that is useful).

So I can see emergent facts and experience emerging events. Unconsciously, they might produce the emotions of fear, joy, anger, etc. and I'll react. In certain instances, I'll consciously use it to find out facts that align with some framework I'm researching. Other times, when I feel bound by something, the Trickster complex will constellate, and I'll use facts to bind the other person, or if there's enough fear in some physical activity, then the Trickster will turn on me, and bind me by making it look more impossible so I'll protect myself by giving up.
There's also a special use by the ego, when it wants to be devious in a playful way, or just silly. This will usually involve sensory experience in some way.

I can also sense how the emerging variables will affect me personally, and this will cause a conscious reaction in favor or against.
If it's a situation not connected to my technical focus, then the reaction will be less conscious, and more emotional.
If it's big enough where the ego feels totally threatened, then the Demonic personality Complex will constellate, and I'll for one, likely feel crushed inside, or perhaps condemned, and then set out to destroy the threat, often from some sort of universalistic moral stance.
When this is constellated a lot, eventually, some sort of resolve will be seen, and then the functional perspective then provides a kind of comfort. It becomes an "angel"

For a long time, I was led to believe that all of the latter might be an NFP's normal Fi "use", and many others seem to think or struggle with that. It was hard to tell one "use" in one type from another, given the functions are basically defined in terms of behaviors. But for the NFP, Fi will be more conscious, tying into a heroic or parental complex, where they valiantly try to solve problems or help others. Total different "use" of it than mine; including the "good" use, which is still connected with something very negative, even if a past experience.

So this should help understand the three different types of role "undifferentiated" functions play, and how their "use" degrades from a normal conscious use by the ego, to unconscious connection with emotions and reactions, and then, (for the shadows) the archetypes (including their positive flipsides).
 
#29 ·
Here are some new additions to my page on type. For those who might have read the full version (Temperament Part 2: The MBTI's 16 types and Cognitive Functions), I have been revamping it, to try to improve the flow. I had been adding new stuff as I went along, understanding the concepts better, and it got to the point that the whole flow was interrupted. So now, I have gone back to just building up the type code letter by letter, and moved some of the deeper info on function definitions and archetypes to later.

[With the new terms used for the functions in the above post]:

...we see that the type defining dominant and auxiliary must be JePi or PeJi because:

Emergent data (Pe) produces variable situations (Ji)
Stored data (Pi) is best for set procedures (Je)

Using these definitions of the functions the tandems come together as follows:
SeNi: emergent experience compared with stored inferences (patterns)
NeSi: emergent inferences compared with stored experience (facts)
TeFi: technical (impersonal) considerations are set, so humane (personal) considerations must then be variable in deference to them.
FeTi: humane considerations are set, so technical considerations must be variable, in deference to them.

They've also been expressed as:

TiFe: "I think, we feel"
FiTe: "I feel; we think"

I've never seen this one, but by extension:
SiNe: I experienced, we infer
SeNi: we experience, I infer

(I had since gone with "inferences" for N, but just today, I decided "conceptualization" would probably be a bit more all-inclusive. Also, I have since decided on "tangibles" for S instead of just "experiences").

Thinking and Feeling function's connection to literal "thinking" and "feeling":

The literal terms are based on the emotionality of the process, with emotion representing more of a deeper personal involvement in the process, in contrast to a detached impersonal pondering of subjects. This is where the confusion about "Feeling=emotions" comes from, but it says nothing about the humane or technical focused content of the process, which is what the T/F functions are about.

Functions and gender roles

At this point, it's probably good to mention the problem of gender and the judging attitudes, and the roles formed around them. Either can gender can be either T or F. But because females are naturally designed to be the mothers, carrying and nurturing the young child, their natural focus has shifted more to the "humane" or "personal" side of life. (Including being more in touch with the emotions). Since males then were the breadwinners, and the strong protectors, they became more focused on the "technical" or "impersonal". The traditional roles of society formed around this, with the typical model of a woman being said to be SFJ or SFP, and the typical model of a man being STJ or at least STP. (Notice how both are S).
Even though modern society has been changing the roles and integrating both genders to the same sorts of careers and family tasks, the associations have stuck. This can cause type confusion for female T's, and both type and "masculinity" problems for male F's. I have noticed particularly that female ITJ's (especially ISTJ's) and ETP's, who both have tertiary Feeling, will look a lot like Feelers. Male EFP's and I imagine, IFJ's (particularly INFJ) will have tertiary Thinking, and are said to look a lot like Thinkers. The tertiary as will be discussed later, is often carried by a complex that is said to "inflate". This will lead to it becoming very visible in the personality, so a woman's tertiary Feeling, especially, will often be very prominent and color their outward behavior, fitting the traditional roles.

Different perspectives with the functions

Personality theory is a subject that covers both the technical and the humane. It's ultimate goal is humane, or "personal" (how we can improve our lives and relationships), but it consists of technical (impersonal) structures, such as matrices of factors and analysis of linear cause and effect We are both living human beings (humane) and yet, we are also still physical things (technical). So it is possible to analyze ourselves from either a humane or technical perspective, or a combination of both. We also have likes, wants, desires and values, which are properties of the ego, not the judgment preference. T/F will be determined, not by these things in themselves, but by the perspective we look at them through.
So both T's and F's can be found, pretty much equally, in the discussions. In online discussions, it is often hard for some people to tell which of these two poles they prefer, because we all end up referencing a lot of both logic and personal subjects. There is a predominance of N's, however, as the theories provide a "big picture", so to speak, of human interaction, where when I try to discuss the stuff with an S heavy family and friends, they're not interested. I had noticed, they seemed more focused on just "living" day to day life than building models of its patterns, and their discussions reflect this, in that it is almost entirely recounts of what other people said and did rather than putting together a bigger picture).

Not realizing these distinctions, I had started off jumping into a couple of online lists populated mostly by F's (mostly N also), who discussed all aspects of the theory, focusing on the theoretical big picture as well as technical details, but then had to wonder why they thought I was being too "impersonal" when I focused on factors of comparitive personality systems. For them, it was more about self-improvement and relationships. To me, those were just "fringe benefits" of a series of symmetries that finally has some kind of practical use to be discussable with others. (Ironically, they all thought I was an F, because of the "enthusiasm". T was supposedly "detached" emotionally. This was a common, but mistaken association, and one of the things I'm really trying to clear up with the "humane vs technical" terms)
 
#31 ·
Functions and gender roles

At this point, it's probably good to mention the problem of gender and the judging attitudes, and the roles formed around them. Either can gender can be either T or F. But because females are naturally designed to be the mothers, carrying and nurturing the young child, their natural focus has shifted more to the "humane" or "personal" side of life.
Is this a lifelong shift, or a shift that occurs during pregnancy or early parenthood? I'm curious about the energy investment (evolutionary cost*) of being nurturing and personal when not a parent. During pregnancy (or early parenthood), a propensity to be more nurturing or personal might 'kick in' (could possibly be a hormonal thing)... but it seems like a waste of energy for a female to develop a more humane focus, outside of natural functional development, at a time when it's not necessary.

*If your discussion of natural gender roles is not based on evolution, then please ignore this paragraph.

(Including being more in touch with the emotions).
It seems to me that caring is interpersonal, whereas emotional awareness is intrapersonal. I do think you need emotions to be a good parent (sociopaths probably don't make the best parents, lol) but emotional awareness? I'm not disagreeing with you, I would just like to hear your reasoning behind this. Thanks.

Since males then were the breadwinners, and the strong protectors, they became more focused on the "technical" or "impersonal". The traditional roles of society formed around this, with the typical model of a woman being said to be SFJ or SFP, and the typical model of a man being STJ or at least STP. (Notice how both are S).
The same question applies to the male's technical orientation as to the female's humane one. I do agree about the 'traditional roles', though.

I have noticed particularly that female ITJ's (especially ISTJ's) and ETP's, who both have tertiary Feeling, will look a lot like Feelers. Male EFP's and I imagine, IFJ's (particularly INFJ) will have tertiary Thinking, and are said to look a lot like Thinkers. The tertiary as will be discussed later, is often carried by a complex that is said to "inflate". This will lead to it becoming very visible in the personality, so a woman's tertiary Feeling, especially, will often be very prominent and color their outward behavior, fitting the traditional roles.
A few months ago I came to a similar conclusion about tertiary T and F functions. But I wonder if different types are affected differently. I have noticed that male SFJs in particular try very hard to come across as Ts. One I know says he wants to be more 'logical' and 'objective' -- but, hilariously, wanting to conform to gender roles is highly Fe in the first place. Indeed, there is a desire to be more T-like, but it's Fe-driven, and that Fe is what shows outwardly. I don't think he is actually more T, he just wants to be. By contrast, male FPs I know (I only know NFPs) do not try to hide their F at all, especially ENFPs. ETA: They also do not seem to want to be more T-like.

I wonder if an ETP female's Fe could cause its own development, in a positive feedback loop.

... they seemed more focused on just "living" day to day life than building models of its patterns, and their discussions reflect this, in that it is almost entirely recounts of what other people said and did rather than putting together a bigger picture).
I agree. I have noticed that they have more interest in exchanging information than interpreting it and forming patterns.
 
#30 ·
The functions represent different ways of building neurological connections from the frontal cortex back to the limbic area, whose motives reach awareness as images freighted with emotion. (Which are generally forms of "archetypes"). An example of this is when something happens, and we use a metaphor to convey how we feel. These images are filled out by personal experience. The functions translate this limbic motivation into cognitive data, allowing us to redirect the instinctual "energies" the limbic system mobilizes to activities that have individual meaning for us.

The way this works is, we have a situation. We take in data from what is happening. If it is a negative situation, then our instinctual reactions and emotions such as fear kick in, just like they do for animals. The difference is that the animals remain guided by the instincts. Both have "sensation" of what is happening, but the human cortex interprets the data, and if the preference is sensation itself, then the person will focus more on what is seen, heard, felt, etc. and react to it based on these factors. If the preference is iNtuition, the person will instead connect the data to a larger meaning that is not immediately seen, such as the possible or likely outcomes. If the person prefers Thinking, they will focus on the cause and effect of the impersonal elements of the situation, both in analyzing why it happened, as well as in deciding on courses of action. If the person prefers Feeling, they will focus on the more "humane" or personal aspects of the situation. How it affects people, especially emotionally. —That any courses of action should take into consideration their needs and well being.

The types all went through the same situation, yet the functions interpreted it differently, and this by focusing on different aspects of it. Each person will generally prefer one of the first two, to take in information, and one of the second two, to make decisions. However, depending on the situation, the person might use the other functions instead.

For the type preferring concrete tangible data, any immediate abstractions or inferences from this data implied will simply support the emotional investment the person has in that concrete data. For the person preferring abstract data, the concrete reality he sees before him will simply be used to support the inferring process. For the person who prefers technical criteria for decisions, any humane "value" he places on them will support his Thinking, rather than being a differentiated "Feeling" process. And for the person who prefers humane considerations, and logical, technical conclusions will support the humane endeavor somehow. What determines the true "preference" is not the "function" you might see him "using" at any given time, but rather the ultimate perspective it is supporting.


We can see why, when a person is geared to focus on technical things, and suppress the humane; when forced to deal with the humane, such as in a situation where his life is severely affected, it will trigger a strong negative reaction, which is all the repressed stuff erupting from the unsconscious. Likewise, when someone normally focused on the humane is forced to deal with the technical, this might also violently erupt, as the part of themselves that would put logical efficiency first feels cold and inhuman to them.

To sum it up, the different ways the functions manifest:
1) Differentiated (the dominant ego perspective)
2) Undifferentiated: linked to the ego's dominant network
• ego-syntonic archetype complexes (auxiliary-parent; tertiary-child, inferior)
• general "uses" of the functions. We can all process tangible inferential, technical and humane data
3) Undifferentiated: Tied to the emotions at the limbic level through imaginal representation —ego dystonic archetypes (Opposing, witch, etc), other complexes, instinctual reactions.
 
#33 ·
To expand upon an earlier point; now expanding from the four functions to the eight function-attitudes:

We all can engage external tangible data
We all can reference a storehouse of tangible data
We all can infer from the external data
We all can infer from a storehouse of impressions
We all can arrange the technical aspects of life to make sense in the environment
We all can demand that the technical aspects of life must make sense to us personally
We all can arrange the humane aspects of life to be harmonious with the environment
We all can demand that the humane aspects of life must be harmonious in our individual estimation

...but only SOME will focus on certain of these perspectives or others, depending on our functional and attitude preference, or according to the way that these processes surface through the emotionally freighted complexes of the ego's structure.
 
#34 ·
Here's a way to put things I just thought of:

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, and technical and humane aspects, which both emerge and vary, and can be stored or set in our memory.

So if I pick out of a situation the technical and variable elements, then the humane and set
elements are implicit, in having basically been differentiated or set apart.

This works for the shadows and archetypes as well:
I feel bound in a situation (which constellates the Trickster), which also implies a form of negation (which constellates the Senex). So the part of me that feels bound by the current reality will accuse someone deemed responsible of "thinking it's funny" or "playing around", which are "bad child" projections. (I also ask "what do they get out of it?") A bad child implies a need for a critical parent to point out and chastize him. They compensate for the presence of each other. So this simultaneously erupts, providing the authoritarian anger and blaming posture, using an conceptual meaning (even if off the wall) of the situation implicit in view of the tangible reality I'm reacting to in the first place.
 
#36 ·
Continuing to try to integrate these ways of putting these things into a more refined definition:

S What it is, tangibly
N What's its origin/destination, conceptually
T What it is, technically
F What's its worth, humanely
e What I can add to it (merge with object)
i What I can take out of it (according to subject)
J Add to a set standard, subtract according to a data storehouse
P Add to emergent data, subtract from variables according to an internal standard

Se what I can add to what is tangible
Si what I can subtract from what is tangible (not relevant to internal data)
Ne what I can add to its conceptual trajectory
Ni what I can subtract from its conceptual trajectory (not relevant to internal data)
Te what I can add to what it is technically
Ti what I can subtract from what it is technically (not relevant to internal standard)
Fe what I can add to its humane worth
Fi what I can subtract from its humane worth (not relevant to internal standard)
 
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