Information

Do the Jungian Cognitive Functions/ Processes really exist?

Do the Jungian Cognitive Functions/ Processes really exist?


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Background

Many of us must have come across personality theories like MBTI which use part of Carl Jung's concepts to make a theoretical system used to divide people into types. For example, MBTI says that if the person is not neurotic or something like that, then he/she must fall into one among the 16 personality types that have been defined. Over simplification of the MBTI over the Internet has made the base of this theory unknown to many people, but talking about that in this question helps nobody.

MBTI as taken by psychologists, seems to be centered more around the concept of Functions more than the four letter model. Typing a person is done generally after recognizing their Dominant function. Some psychologists seem to have made their own different models about these Cognitive Functions (like John Beebe and Lenore Thomson for example). Some claiming 8 exist in the human Psyche, and some claiming 4 exist, some saying they gradually develop, some opposing the views and so on…

Recently, I have come across a Youtube video in which a researcher claims to have made this theory scientifically observable and researchable - and seeing that this video has been made at Google Talks makes it believable.

I think Jung's concepts - which are based on observation, introspection, Energy flow etc. seem to be somewhat like Pseudoscience to any scientific mind. However, after watching this video I started to wonder whether what he says is really true or not?

Additional Material

  • An extract from Carl Jung's Psychological Types where Jung speaks about these types.

  • An online forum where each personality type profile exists as a sticky thread in its own subforum. These profiles use what seems like a modified version of the Cognitive Functions concept.

  • EDIT: What Dario Nardi speaks about in the video is essentially an outline of what he published in his book. I have found a forum post where a summary of material he published in his book has been written. Please take a look at it if you don't have time to watch the whole video. Here's the link to the presentation he shows in the video (a pdf file).

Questions

  • Short version: Is the evidence quoted in the above source (the forum link) a valid evidence to support a concept like Cognitive Functions as described by Jung?

  • Long version: There are two main things in the above source (the forum link) that I want someone to confirm as a proper evidence.

Firstly, as quoted by the source above, Nardi speaks about various regions in Neo Cortex region where he placed these EEG sensors. From what I have read, it seems that he mapped the regions to some activities.

Here's what he says about these regions is like:

Fp1 "Chief Judge" (is used when/to)

  • Provide a reason

  • Decide between options

  • Detect an error

Writing all of them here would make this question look like a book, but I want to know whether all this is as rigid as it looks or not. I want to know where Nardi is making a mistake in this research. (There could be some activities which might have been mapped wrongly, or those which have deeper mechanisms in brain rather than just in Neocortex region.)

Secondly, I will not be long here, but there is a similar part where he speaks about various patterns (in regions of brain "lighting up") he observed during this observation. Although asking for an evidence to this would be basically an extension to the first question, but my question here would be whether such patterns (not necessarily the same ones) have ever been classified/suggested in literature already?

Lastly, (this might be rhetoric question) if the answer to the above question is affirmative, Does this imply that theories like MBTI are really valid, and that there are really types among people's brains? (Nardi tried to map those patterns into types of people, as I said their dominant function)


The research done by Dardio Nardi (the researcher you're referring to) clearly shows that something is there. Although, he would have no way of knowing as to whether his samples were of the particular type, or if what's being demonstrated really demonstrates use of that particular cognitive function. E.g doing something logical doesn't necessarily mean you're 'using' Ti.

I do believe we have innate, instinctive preferences and can classify them into types as such, but I truly doubt that Jung's work would be 100% accurate. Even Jung was hesitant to be exacting in his understanding of the psyche - which lead him to leave a lot of holes in his model.

Myers and Briggs filled those holes with many assumptions - which is why the functions are a far better application to finding somebody's 'type'.

So yes, I would say that they do exist. But probably not exactly in the way they were described by Jung. Hopefully people begin to think critically about this, then maybe we can actually see some results.


Personality Tools: Keirsey Four Temperaments vs. Carl Jung’s Cognitive Functions

Why, and what’s the difference if the first letter is about gathering information and the second one about make decisions. It’s a bit confusing to me why Keirsey would use Js and Ps instead of Ts and Fs.

There are actually a couple of schools of thought about Myers-Briggs. If you’re not familiar with them it can get really confusing, especially when people start referencing each methodology without naming it assuming you already know what they’re talking about.

While more are springing up, the two most popular ways of understanding Myers-Briggs are Carl Jung’s “cognitive functions” and David Keirsey’s “Four Temperaments.”

Each starts out with the four dichotomies of Myers-Briggs and then branches out to two different roads. So, when you begin a dialog about Keirsey Four Temperaments, you’re (at least temporarily) suspending a conversation about Jungian cognitive functions.

Jungian cognitive functions is the theory that there are eight primary mental processes the brain uses to learn new information and evaluate that information, or make decisions. There are four learning functions (called “perceiving processes), and four decision-making functions (called “judging processes”). Depending upon your Myers-Briggs type, you will have one of the learning processes and one of the decision-making processes as your favorite.

The learning processes are based on the Sensor/iNtuitive dichotomy, with each having an extraverted and an introverted expression, or version of itself. So, the four processes are Introverted Sensing, Extraverted Sensing, Introverted iNtuition and Extraverted iNtuition. The decision-making processes are based on the Thinker/Feeler dichotomy, and they also have an introverted and an extraverted expression. They are Introverted Feeling, Extraverted Feeling, Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Thinking. (Each of these processes correlate to different Genius Styles in the Genius Style Assessment.)

In the Keirsey Four Temperament model, there is no mention of cognitive functions. This is mostly due to Keirsey himself finding cognitive functions to be without much use. Instead, he harkens back to older models which frequently place people into a four quadrant system. You can see strong correlations to the ancient model of Sanguine, Melancholy, Phlegmatic and Choleric types.

This was a good choice on Keirsey’s part – his Keirsey Four Temperament model became one of the most accessible entrances into Myers-Briggs of all time, with his book Please Understand Me outselling even Isabel Briggs-Myer’s book Gifts Differing. Approximately 40 million people have taken the Keirsey Temperament Sorter.

The Keirsey Four Temperaments

SJ, or “The Guardian”

These would be anyone who has tested out as a Sensor and a Judger. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ESTJ, ISTJ, ESFJ, ISFJ. Keirsey describes them as finding a place to belong, to contribute to society, and have a sense of security and confidence in their abilities, is key to the Guardian’s sense of well-being.

SP, or “The Artisan”

These would be anyone who has tested out as a Sensor and a Perceiver. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ESTP, ISTP, ESFP, ISFP. Keirsey describes them as having a life of action and freedom is what makes an Artisan tick and gives them a sense of being alive.

NF, or “The Idealist”

These would be anyone who has tested out as an iNtuitive and a Feeler. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ENFJ, INFJ, ENFP, INFP. Keirsey describes them as seeking to have a life of meaning, to help themselves and others grow to be the best that they can be. They do not want to be a copycat of someone else, but want to be seen as a unique and valuable individual.

NT, or “The Rational”

These would be anyone who has tested out as an iNtuitive and a Thinker. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ENTJ, INTJ, ENTP, INTP. Keirsey describes them as the drive towards constantly increasing their knowledge base and being highly competent is what gives Rationals a sense of personal satisfaction.

Why does Keirsey pair together Sensors with the Judger/Perceiver dichotomy, but iNtuitives with the Thinker/Feeler dichotomy?

That’s a great question. I don’t know if I’ve ever read Keirsey explain it (and if you have, please share in the comments!), but I have a theory on why it works.

Sensors understand information primarily using their senses because they are interested in what is reliable and verifiable. That makes them focused on their environment, the world that is accessible through the senses. The Judger/Perceiver dichotomy describes your relationship with your environment. Judgers like their environment to be organized, and Perceivers prefer their environment to be open-frame. (See more in the blog post, “What is a Judger and What is a Perceiver?“)

So, it makes sense that, to a Sensor, their preferred relationship with the environment would be the most influential component. Which gives you SJ and SP.

iNtuitives, on the other hand, understand information in a more conceptual way. They like asking “What if?” questions and speculating on what for the moment may only exist in their imagination. If the question that drives you is “What if?” it’s logical that vetting those ‘what if’ scenarios would be extremely necessary.

So, it makes sense that, to an iNtuitive, the dichotomy that informs how they evaluate information – Thinking or Feeling – becomes the most influential component. Which gives you NT and NF.
If you attempt to find cognitive functions in the Keirsey Four Temperament model, you won’t get very far. While the SP and SJ temperaments allow for shared functions (all SJs use Introverted Sensing, or “Memory” in the Genius System, and all SPs use Extraverted Sensing, or “Sensation”), the same doesn’t apply to the two iNtuitive temperaments. That because you need to know the Judger or Perceiver dichotomy preference to determine cognitive functions.

I think we all have a desire to overlay the models we become familiar with to 1) understand them better and 2) give it a sense of elegance. In the case of Jungian cognitive functions and the Keirsey Four Temperaments, I found it far more helpful to study them on their own first. There WILL be similarities, but there won’t a perfect correlation between the two.


Originally Posted by iauiugu

Emedia is not better than print, it is that the content of emedia is print. So emedia is our new environment, just as print was once our new environment.

The principle is that any new environment contains the previous environment as content.

And an interesting corollary is that any new environment is invisible, so we focus on the old environment as content.

Also any new environment numbs us so it can go about changing the sense ratios of our psyche.

Member Join Date May 2012 MBTI infj Enneagram 415 Posts 46

Extroverted vs Introverted Cognitive Functions

The one psychological concept that almost everyone is familiar with: Extroversion and Introversion. However, many people and new metrics (including the Big 5) misattribute Sociability to Extroversion.

It’s true that ExFx (Extroverted + Feeling) Jungian types tend to be sociable no matter what, but for especially ExTx types (Extroverted + Thinking), the degree of sociability can highly vary, leading to mistyping them as introverts.

Whenever there is a debate on whether someone is Type X or Z, the question should always come back to the essentials.

The first question in this context must always be:
Are we really talking of Extroversion or Introversion?

The House of your Mind

The window analogy illustrates the difference between Introverts and Extroverts. This person represents the Introvert, who is looking outside from the inside.

Imagine you stand at a window.

There are two ways you can stand at it. Either you are inside the house looking outside, or you are outside looking inside the house. This is equivalent to introversion vs extroversion.

The introvert looks outside from the inside, the extrovert looks inside from the outside.

The introvert starts from a subjective perspective tied to their individual experience/understanding. Whereas the extrovert starts from a more objective perspective, found in the external world, removed from themselves.

There is no way for someone to both look or be outside or inside at the same time OR to both be more subjective or objective.

That is why pure ”ambiversion“ (50-50) is impossible. Extroversion and Introversion cannot exist in the same time and space.

However, we are all able to go inside the house and look outside or vice versa. In that sense, we can move from extroverted to introverted thought processes and experiences, and vice versa.

But again, we can never use extroversion and introversion at the same time. And we all have one starting point. We either start from the internal or the external, and from there move to the other area.

So as a whole, everyone is technically ”ambiverted“ – no one is a complete introvert or extrovert. However, we all have a starting point. Introverts always start from the inside looking out, and extroverts always start from the outside looking in.

The extrovert can move to the introverted side by entering the house of his mind, and the introvert can step outside of the house in her mind. But again, the starting point is different, and that distinguishes the introvert from the extrovert.

The same principle applies to the functions or information elements. Now that you understand this core principle, we can add the Jungian dichotomies of Sensing, Feeling, Intuition, and Thinking.


What is Jungian analytic psychology, and is it biblical?

Without a doubt, there are many theories of psychology that are at odds with the Bible. However, it is possible to incorporate certain aspects of secular theory into Bible-based counseling. The key is to compare a psychological theory with the truth of the Bible ideas and methods that line up with Scripture may be helpful. Psychology is a big field, and a Christian counselor needs to examine a variety of psychological theories. The following is a review of Jung’s analytic psychology. Please refer to our related articles for reviews of other common psychological theories.

Explanation of Jungian Analytic Psychology Theory
Carl Jung was a student and contemporary of Freud. However, his analytic psychology varies greatly from Freud’s psychoanalysis. Jung’s theory embraces religion – albeit as a psychological concept – and focuses more on meaning than on biological determination. Jung believed that people are shaped by their past and future and that people generally move toward greater self-realization and wholeness to ultimately achieve "individuation," wherein the conscious and unconscious parts of personality are integrated.

Jung embraced the concept of a personal unconscious, but viewed it as connected to human history and influenced by the transpersonal (the spiritual, transcendent part of man). The collective unconscious, Jung posited, contains memories of human history and guides human development. Jung valued spirituality and experiential knowledge. At times, Jung used Christian terminology, and he once famously affirmed God’s existence, but his concept of “God” was anything but the God of the Bible.

Jung’s theory of personality rests on archetypes. Known through dreams, myths, and traditions, archetypes are ideas and images shared in the human experience. Jung identified them as the persona, or mask worn by an individual in public the anima, or feminine side the animus, or masculine side the shadow, which most humans prefer not to acknowledge and which they often project onto others and the self, which functions when the other aspects of a person are increasingly integrated and whole. In analytic theory, both men and women have feminine and masculine sides. Jung also suggested personality types. His introversion, extroversion, thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuitive types provide a loose foundation for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality test.

According to Jung, health depends on becoming increasingly self-realized and whole—fulfilling one’s destiny as determined by the unconscious and living with a balance among the archetypes. He maintained that it was not possible to achieve complete individuation in this lifetime, but that it is something toward which humans should work. In some ways, Jung saw psychological health as the same as spiritual health.

Jungian therapy is very individualized, based on client type. Symbols carry great importance. Experience is highly valued. The goal of analytic therapy is to make the unconscious, conscious so that the unconscious can guide the client to self-realization and a proper balance of archetypes. Many psychologists view Jungian analytic psychology as a growth therapy that works best for the middle-aged and the fairly well-adjusted.

Biblical Commentary on Jungian Analytic Psychology
Jung’s acceptance of spirituality is refreshing to some Christians. However, Jung does not suggest that there is any truth to be found in spirituality it is simply a means of connection with the collective unconscious. Jung saw spirituality as a personal, mystical experience. This is clearly at odds with biblical teaching. Faith is not just a personal, mystical experience it is founded in the truth of God.

The concept of the collective unconscious is disconcerting to most Christians. However, the Bible neither confirms nor denies its existence. We all come from Adam and Eve and thus can be viewed as a human family. Archetypes and thematic symbols could be structure placed in us by God.

Jung’s concept of the shadow archetype caused him to embrace suffering and look for meaning within pain, rather than attempt to avoid discomfort. Christians know there is meaning in suffering. However, Jung was somewhat noncommittal about the nature and existence of evil. At times he seemed to trivialize evil or explain it away. Other times, he spoke of evil and good co-existing, and even suggested that Satan be added to the Godhead! Jung’s thoughts are clearly unbiblical here. Evil does exist, but it is separate from God. In God there is no evil (Psalm 92:15 John 1:4-5). Evil is not eternal and is not a co-equal force with good. Satan is a created being who has been defeated (John 14:30-31 16:33 Hebrews 2:14-15). Though he currently has power in the world (2 Corinthians 4:4), Satan will ultimately lose it all (Revelation 20:7-10). Sin is not something we attempt to balance with good, but something that dies in us when we are made alive in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17, 21).

Perhaps the most problematic aspect of Jung’s theory is his emphasis on the self. He seems to promote a concept of health in which a person must simply become his or her true self. The driving force of this “becoming” is the unconscious. The Bible paints a very different picture. Humans are fallen creatures (Romans 5:12). There is nothing we can do to make ourselves better, for we are dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1, 8-10 Colossians 2:13). Certainly, we are expected to know ourselves and to properly steward the gifts God has given us (Romans 12:1-8 1 Corinthians 12). However, our process of self-discovery must be based on God to be truly glorifying to God and beneficial to us. It is as we look to God to know Him more that we also learn more of ourselves. “Whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:35).

Please note that a large portion of this information has been adapted from Modern Psychotherapies: A Comprehensive Christian Appraisal by Stanton Jones and Richard Butman and Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy by Gerald Corey.


What You Need To Know About The 8 Cognitive Functions

One of the most influential psychoanalysts of our time, Carl Jung , spent a great deal of his life trying to map out our unique cognitive functions and how they shape our personalities.

Carl Jung described cognitive functions as: “particular mental processes -or attitudes- within a person’s psyche that are present regardless of common circumstance.”

In other words, they are your a set of mental processes -or behaviors- that you dominantly act upon when making decisions.

You are probably asking yourself, “ok Mindvalley, that’s all good and dandy, but what do I do with this information?”

Well here’s the baseline of it all…


The 12 Jungian archetypes

1. The Sage

The sage is a free thinker. Their intellect and knowledge are their reason for living, their essence. They seek to understand the world and their being by using their intelligence and analytical skills. They always have a fact, a quote, or a logical argument on the tip of their tongue.

2. The Innocent

The innocent seems to have read and absorbed every self-help book in the world. They’re optimistic and always searching for happiness. The innocent sees the good in everything. They want to feel well-adjusted to the world around them. The innocent also wants to please others and feel like they belong.

3. The Explorer

The explorer is a bold traveler. They set out without a clear path and are always open to novelty and adventure. The explorer has a deep love of discovering new places and new things about themselves. The downside of the explorer archetype is that they’re always searching for perfection and they’re never satisfied.

4. The Ruler

The ruler is a classic leader. They believe they should be the one to bring order to any situation. The ruler is stable, strives for excellence, and wants everyone to follow their lead. They tend to have plenty of reasons why everyone should listen to them. This is one of the 12 Jungian archetypes related to power. The ruler, in their desire to impose their will on others, can easily become a tyrant.

5. The Creator

The creator has a profound desire for freedom because they love novelty. They love to transform things in order to make something completely new. The creator is clever, non-conformist, and self-sufficient. They’re imaginative and good-humored. However, they can also be inconsistent and spend more time thinking than actually doing.

6. The Caregiver

The caregiver feels stronger than other people. Consequently, they offer maternal protection to those around them. They want to protect people from harm and try to prevent any danger or risk from threatening other people’s happiness. In extreme cases, the caregiver turns into a martyr who constantly reminds everyone of their sacrifices.

7. The Magician

The magician is like a great revolutionary. They regenerate and renew not just for themselves, but for others as well. They’re constantly growing and transforming. The negative side of the magician archetype is that their mood can be contagious. They sometimes turn positive events into negative ones.

8. The Hero

The axis of a hero’s life is power. The hero has an uncommon vitality and resistance that they use to fight for power or honor. They’ll do anything to avoid losing. In fact, they don’t lose because they never give up. The hero can be overly ambitious and controlling.

9. The Rebel

The rebel is a transgressor. They provoke people and don’t care at all about other people’s opinions. As a result, they like going against the grain and thinking for themselves. They don’t like to be pressured or influenced. The negative side to the rebel archetype is that they can become self-destructive.

10. The Lover

The lover is all heart and sensitivity. They love love and love to lavish it on other people. Their greatest happiness is feeling loved. They enjoy everything that’s pleasing to the senses. They value beauty (in every sense of the word) above all.

11. The Jester

The jester likes to laugh, even at themselves. They don’t wear any masks and tend to break down other people’s walls. They never take themselves seriously because their goal is to enjoy life. The negative side of the jester is that they can be lewd, lazy, and greedy.

12. The Orphan

The orphan archetype walks around with open wounds. They feel betrayed and disappointed. They want other people to take charge of their life. When no one does, they feel disappointed. They tend to spend time with people who feel just like them. The orphan often plays the victim. They pretend to be innocent. The orphan has a cynical side and manipulative talent.

The 12 Jungian archetypes we describe here aren’t the only version of Jung’s ideas. Other versions include different archetypes. However, they’re essentially the same, just with slightly different names. You can use these archetypes in many fields, including psychotherapy, marketing, and art.


Se - Extroverted Sensing
Extraverted Sensing occurs when we become aware of what is in the physical world in rich detail. We may be drawn to act on what we experience to get an immediate result. We notice relevant facts and occurrences in a sea of data and experiences, learning all the facts we can about the immediate context or area of focus and what goes on in that context. An active seeking of more and more input to get the whole picture may occur until all sources of input have been exhausted or something else captures our attention. Extraverted Sensing is operating when we freely follow exciting physical impulses or instincts as they come up and enjoy the thrill of action in the present moment. A oneness with the physical world and a total absorption may exist as we move, touch, and sense what is around us. The process involves instantly reading cues to see how far we can go in a situation and still get the impact we want or respond to the situation with presence.

Si - Introverted Sensing
Introverted Sensing often involves storing data and information, then comparing and contrasting the current situation with similar ones. The immediate experience or words are instantly linked with the prior experiences, and we register a similarity or a difference—for example, noticing that some food doesn’t taste the same or is saltier than it usually is. Introverted Sensing is also operating when we see someone who reminds us of someone else. Sometimes a feeling associated with the recalled image comes into our awareness along with the information itself. Then the image can be so strong, our body responds as if reliving the experience. The process also involves reviewing the past to draw on the lessons of history, hindsight, and experience. With introverted Sensing, there is often great attention to detail and getting a clear picture of goals and objectives and what is to happen. There can be a oneness with ageless customs that help sustain civilization and culture and protect what is known and long-lasting, even while what is reliable changes.

Ne - Extroverted Intuiting
Extraverted iNtuiting involves noticing hidden meanings and interpreting them, often entertaining a wealth of possible interpretations from just one idea or interpreting what someone’s behavior really means. It also involves seeing things “as if,” with various possible representations of reality. Using this process, we can juggle many different ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and meanings in our mind at once with the possibility that they are all true. This is like weaving themes and threads together. We don’t know the weave until a thought thread appears or is drawn out in the interaction of thoughts, often brought in from other contexts. Thus a strategy or concept often emerges from the here-and-now interactions, not appearing as a whole beforehand. Using this process we can really appreciate brainstorming and trust what emerges, enjoying imaginative play with scenarios and combining possibilities, using a kind of cross-contextual thinking. Extraverted iNtuiting also can involve catalyzing people and extemporaneously shaping situations, spreading an atmosphere of change through emergent leadership.

Ni - Introverted Intuiting
Introverted iNtuiting involves synthesizing the seemingly paradoxical or contradictory, which takes understanding to a new level. Using this process, we can have moments when completely new, unimagined realizations come to us. A disengagement from interactions in the room occurs, followed by a sudden “Aha!” or “That’s it!” The sense of the future and the realizations that come from introverted iNtuiting have a sureness and an imperative quality that seem to demand action and help us stay focused on fulfilling our vision or dream of how things will be in the future. Using this process, we might rely on a focal device or symbolic action to predict, enlighten, or transform. We could find ourselves laying out how the future will unfold based on unseen trends and telling signs. This process can involve working out complex concepts or systems of thinking or conceiving of symbolic or novel ways to understand things that are universal. It can lead to creating transcendent experiences or solutions.

Te - Extroverted Thinking
Contingency planning, scheduling, and quantifying utilize the process of extraverted Thinking. Extraverted Thinking helps us organize our environment and ideas through charts, tables, graphs, flow charts, outlines, and so on. At its most sophisticated, this process is about organizing and monitoring people and things to work efficiently and productively. Empirical thinking is at the core of extraverted Thinking when we challenge someone’s ideas based on the logic of the facts in front of us or lay out reasonable explanations for decisions or conclusions made, often trying to establish order in someone else’s thought process. In written or verbal communication, extraverted Thinking helps us easily follow someone else’s logic, sequence, or organization. It also helps us notice when something is missing, like when someone says he or she is going to talk about four topics and talks about only three. In general, it allows us to compartmentalize many aspects of our lives so we can do what is necessary to accomplish our objectives.

Ti - Introverted Thinking
Introverted Thinking often involves finding just the right word to clearly express an idea concisely, crisply, and to the point. Using introverted Thinking is like having an internal sense of the essential qualities of something, noticing the fine distinctions that make it what it is and then naming it. It also involves an internal reasoning process of deriving subcategories of classes and sub-principles of general principles. These can then be used in problem solving, analysis, and refining of a product or an idea. This process is evidenced in behaviors like taking things or ideas apart to figure out how they work. The analysis involves looking at different sides of an issue and seeing where there is inconsistency. In so doing, we search for a “leverage point” that will fix problems with the least amount of effort or damage to the system. We engage in this process when we notice logical inconsistencies between statements and frameworks, using a model to evaluate the likely accuracy of what’s observed.

Fe - Extroverted Feeling
The process of extraverted Feeling often involves a desire to connect with (or disconnect from) others and is often evidenced by expressions of warmth (or displeasure) and self-disclosure. The “social graces,” such as being polite, being nice, being friendly, being considerate, and being appropriate, often revolve around the process of extraverted Feeling. Keeping in touch, laughing at jokes when others laugh, and trying to get people to act kindly to each other also involve extraverted Feeling. Using this process, we respond according to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others. We may ask people what they want or need or self-disclose to prompt them to talk more about themselves. This often sparks conversation and lets us know more about them so we can better adjust our behavior to them. Often with this process, we feel pulled to be responsible and take care of others’ feelings, sometimes to the point of not separating our feelings from theirs. We may recognize and adhere to shared values, feelings, and social norms to get along.

Fi - Introverted Feeling
It is often hard to assign words to the values used to make introverted Feeling judgments since they are often associated with images, feeling tones, and gut reactions more than words. As a cognitive process, it often serves as a filter for information that matches what is valued, wanted, or worth believing in. There can be a continual weighing of the situational worth or importance of everything and a patient balancing of the core issues of peace and conflict in life’s situations. We engage in the process of introverted Feeling when a value is compromised and we think, “Sometimes, some things just have to be said.” On the other hand, most of the time this process works “in private” and is expressed through actions. It helps us know when people are being fake or insincere or if they are basically good. It is like having an internal sense of the “essence” of a person or a project and reading fine distinctions among feeling tones.


I always thought behaviourism could be debunked fairly easily, it was a whole trend which I believe was based upon a pretty vulgar and militant interpretation of scientific research contra more speculative models, although the fate of psychoanalysis and behaviourism and then alternatives arising afterwards could be considered a vindication of Marx's reinterpretation of Hegel, ie the whole thesis, antithesis, new thesis. That conflict's necessary.

I just think that there's always the capacity for backsliding into what behaviourism was, that "species of animal", I really believe that Dawkins and others are of that breed and they do serious violence to research methodologies and theorising when they manage to exercise influence.

Member Join Date Sep 2011 Posts 37

Originally Posted by highlander

You have that backwards. As discussed at length in this long INTJforum post (which I've already linked to), if you read Gifts Differing with any care, and you read the MBTI Manuals and other official MBTI materials, and you look at the decades of MBTI studies that have centered around the dichotomies and ignored the cognitive functions, and you look at the more recent "Step II" version of the MBTI — which divides the dichotomies into facets and continues to all but ignore the functions — you'll realize that, after putting Jung's original type concepts to the test, Myers came to the conclusion (correctly) that the dichotomies were the true building blocks of type. Myers essentially did nothing with the purported "tertiary" and "inferior" functions, and mostly just gave lip service to the dominant and auxiliary functions. Not only the test, but the MBTI itself, is really built around the dichotomies.

And the dichotomy-centric version of the MBTI doesn't exclude the many aspects of personality associated with preference combinations — e.g., things that NFs or NPs or FPs tend to have in common. And there's no question that descriptions of, say, "Fe" can actually have validity as well as long as they don't go beyond what you might call the piggybacked validity that they get from lining up with the additive effects of the two (or three, as applicable) corresponding dichotomies — e.g., FJ (or EFJ, depending) for "Fe" descriptions.

But it's also worth noting that Myers believed that NF/NT/SF/ST were the most significant preference combinations — more than any of the combinations associated with the functions. And the second edition of the MBTI Manual (which Myers co-authored) had a brief description of characteristics associated with every one of the 24 possible two-letter preference combinations.

Links in INTJforum posts don't work if you're not a member, so here are replacements for two of the links in the post linked above:

Senior Member Join Date Jul 2013 MBTI INTJ Enneagram 5 Posts 657

Extroverted vs Introverted Cognitive Functions

The one psychological concept that almost everyone is familiar with: Extroversion and Introversion. However, many people and new metrics (including the Big 5) misattribute Sociability to Extroversion.

It’s true that ExFx (Extroverted + Feeling) Jungian types tend to be sociable no matter what, but for especially ExTx types (Extroverted + Thinking), the degree of sociability can highly vary, leading to mistyping them as introverts.

Whenever there is a debate on whether someone is Type X or Z, the question should always come back to the essentials.

The first question in this context must always be:
Are we really talking of Extroversion or Introversion?

The House of your Mind

The window analogy illustrates the difference between Introverts and Extroverts. This person represents the Introvert, who is looking outside from the inside.

Imagine you stand at a window.

There are two ways you can stand at it. Either you are inside the house looking outside, or you are outside looking inside the house. This is equivalent to introversion vs extroversion.

The introvert looks outside from the inside, the extrovert looks inside from the outside.

The introvert starts from a subjective perspective tied to their individual experience/understanding. Whereas the extrovert starts from a more objective perspective, found in the external world, removed from themselves.

There is no way for someone to both look or be outside or inside at the same time OR to both be more subjective or objective.

That is why pure ”ambiversion“ (50-50) is impossible. Extroversion and Introversion cannot exist in the same time and space.

However, we are all able to go inside the house and look outside or vice versa. In that sense, we can move from extroverted to introverted thought processes and experiences, and vice versa.

But again, we can never use extroversion and introversion at the same time. And we all have one starting point. We either start from the internal or the external, and from there move to the other area.

So as a whole, everyone is technically ”ambiverted“ – no one is a complete introvert or extrovert. However, we all have a starting point. Introverts always start from the inside looking out, and extroverts always start from the outside looking in.

The extrovert can move to the introverted side by entering the house of his mind, and the introvert can step outside of the house in her mind. But again, the starting point is different, and that distinguishes the introvert from the extrovert.

The same principle applies to the functions or information elements. Now that you understand this core principle, we can add the Jungian dichotomies of Sensing, Feeling, Intuition, and Thinking.


What is Jungian analytic psychology, and is it biblical?

Without a doubt, there are many theories of psychology that are at odds with the Bible. However, it is possible to incorporate certain aspects of secular theory into Bible-based counseling. The key is to compare a psychological theory with the truth of the Bible ideas and methods that line up with Scripture may be helpful. Psychology is a big field, and a Christian counselor needs to examine a variety of psychological theories. The following is a review of Jung’s analytic psychology. Please refer to our related articles for reviews of other common psychological theories.

Explanation of Jungian Analytic Psychology Theory
Carl Jung was a student and contemporary of Freud. However, his analytic psychology varies greatly from Freud’s psychoanalysis. Jung’s theory embraces religion – albeit as a psychological concept – and focuses more on meaning than on biological determination. Jung believed that people are shaped by their past and future and that people generally move toward greater self-realization and wholeness to ultimately achieve "individuation," wherein the conscious and unconscious parts of personality are integrated.

Jung embraced the concept of a personal unconscious, but viewed it as connected to human history and influenced by the transpersonal (the spiritual, transcendent part of man). The collective unconscious, Jung posited, contains memories of human history and guides human development. Jung valued spirituality and experiential knowledge. At times, Jung used Christian terminology, and he once famously affirmed God’s existence, but his concept of “God” was anything but the God of the Bible.

Jung’s theory of personality rests on archetypes. Known through dreams, myths, and traditions, archetypes are ideas and images shared in the human experience. Jung identified them as the persona, or mask worn by an individual in public the anima, or feminine side the animus, or masculine side the shadow, which most humans prefer not to acknowledge and which they often project onto others and the self, which functions when the other aspects of a person are increasingly integrated and whole. In analytic theory, both men and women have feminine and masculine sides. Jung also suggested personality types. His introversion, extroversion, thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuitive types provide a loose foundation for the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality test.

According to Jung, health depends on becoming increasingly self-realized and whole—fulfilling one’s destiny as determined by the unconscious and living with a balance among the archetypes. He maintained that it was not possible to achieve complete individuation in this lifetime, but that it is something toward which humans should work. In some ways, Jung saw psychological health as the same as spiritual health.

Jungian therapy is very individualized, based on client type. Symbols carry great importance. Experience is highly valued. The goal of analytic therapy is to make the unconscious, conscious so that the unconscious can guide the client to self-realization and a proper balance of archetypes. Many psychologists view Jungian analytic psychology as a growth therapy that works best for the middle-aged and the fairly well-adjusted.

Biblical Commentary on Jungian Analytic Psychology
Jung’s acceptance of spirituality is refreshing to some Christians. However, Jung does not suggest that there is any truth to be found in spirituality it is simply a means of connection with the collective unconscious. Jung saw spirituality as a personal, mystical experience. This is clearly at odds with biblical teaching. Faith is not just a personal, mystical experience it is founded in the truth of God.

The concept of the collective unconscious is disconcerting to most Christians. However, the Bible neither confirms nor denies its existence. We all come from Adam and Eve and thus can be viewed as a human family. Archetypes and thematic symbols could be structure placed in us by God.

Jung’s concept of the shadow archetype caused him to embrace suffering and look for meaning within pain, rather than attempt to avoid discomfort. Christians know there is meaning in suffering. However, Jung was somewhat noncommittal about the nature and existence of evil. At times he seemed to trivialize evil or explain it away. Other times, he spoke of evil and good co-existing, and even suggested that Satan be added to the Godhead! Jung’s thoughts are clearly unbiblical here. Evil does exist, but it is separate from God. In God there is no evil (Psalm 92:15 John 1:4-5). Evil is not eternal and is not a co-equal force with good. Satan is a created being who has been defeated (John 14:30-31 16:33 Hebrews 2:14-15). Though he currently has power in the world (2 Corinthians 4:4), Satan will ultimately lose it all (Revelation 20:7-10). Sin is not something we attempt to balance with good, but something that dies in us when we are made alive in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:17, 21).

Perhaps the most problematic aspect of Jung’s theory is his emphasis on the self. He seems to promote a concept of health in which a person must simply become his or her true self. The driving force of this “becoming” is the unconscious. The Bible paints a very different picture. Humans are fallen creatures (Romans 5:12). There is nothing we can do to make ourselves better, for we are dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1, 8-10 Colossians 2:13). Certainly, we are expected to know ourselves and to properly steward the gifts God has given us (Romans 12:1-8 1 Corinthians 12). However, our process of self-discovery must be based on God to be truly glorifying to God and beneficial to us. It is as we look to God to know Him more that we also learn more of ourselves. “Whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it” (Mark 8:35).

Please note that a large portion of this information has been adapted from Modern Psychotherapies: A Comprehensive Christian Appraisal by Stanton Jones and Richard Butman and Theory and Practice of Counseling and Psychotherapy by Gerald Corey.


The 12 Jungian archetypes

1. The Sage

The sage is a free thinker. Their intellect and knowledge are their reason for living, their essence. They seek to understand the world and their being by using their intelligence and analytical skills. They always have a fact, a quote, or a logical argument on the tip of their tongue.

2. The Innocent

The innocent seems to have read and absorbed every self-help book in the world. They’re optimistic and always searching for happiness. The innocent sees the good in everything. They want to feel well-adjusted to the world around them. The innocent also wants to please others and feel like they belong.

3. The Explorer

The explorer is a bold traveler. They set out without a clear path and are always open to novelty and adventure. The explorer has a deep love of discovering new places and new things about themselves. The downside of the explorer archetype is that they’re always searching for perfection and they’re never satisfied.

4. The Ruler

The ruler is a classic leader. They believe they should be the one to bring order to any situation. The ruler is stable, strives for excellence, and wants everyone to follow their lead. They tend to have plenty of reasons why everyone should listen to them. This is one of the 12 Jungian archetypes related to power. The ruler, in their desire to impose their will on others, can easily become a tyrant.

5. The Creator

The creator has a profound desire for freedom because they love novelty. They love to transform things in order to make something completely new. The creator is clever, non-conformist, and self-sufficient. They’re imaginative and good-humored. However, they can also be inconsistent and spend more time thinking than actually doing.

6. The Caregiver

The caregiver feels stronger than other people. Consequently, they offer maternal protection to those around them. They want to protect people from harm and try to prevent any danger or risk from threatening other people’s happiness. In extreme cases, the caregiver turns into a martyr who constantly reminds everyone of their sacrifices.

7. The Magician

The magician is like a great revolutionary. They regenerate and renew not just for themselves, but for others as well. They’re constantly growing and transforming. The negative side of the magician archetype is that their mood can be contagious. They sometimes turn positive events into negative ones.

8. The Hero

The axis of a hero’s life is power. The hero has an uncommon vitality and resistance that they use to fight for power or honor. They’ll do anything to avoid losing. In fact, they don’t lose because they never give up. The hero can be overly ambitious and controlling.

9. The Rebel

The rebel is a transgressor. They provoke people and don’t care at all about other people’s opinions. As a result, they like going against the grain and thinking for themselves. They don’t like to be pressured or influenced. The negative side to the rebel archetype is that they can become self-destructive.

10. The Lover

The lover is all heart and sensitivity. They love love and love to lavish it on other people. Their greatest happiness is feeling loved. They enjoy everything that’s pleasing to the senses. They value beauty (in every sense of the word) above all.

11. The Jester

The jester likes to laugh, even at themselves. They don’t wear any masks and tend to break down other people’s walls. They never take themselves seriously because their goal is to enjoy life. The negative side of the jester is that they can be lewd, lazy, and greedy.

12. The Orphan

The orphan archetype walks around with open wounds. They feel betrayed and disappointed. They want other people to take charge of their life. When no one does, they feel disappointed. They tend to spend time with people who feel just like them. The orphan often plays the victim. They pretend to be innocent. The orphan has a cynical side and manipulative talent.

The 12 Jungian archetypes we describe here aren’t the only version of Jung’s ideas. Other versions include different archetypes. However, they’re essentially the same, just with slightly different names. You can use these archetypes in many fields, including psychotherapy, marketing, and art.


Personality Tools: Keirsey Four Temperaments vs. Carl Jung’s Cognitive Functions

Why, and what’s the difference if the first letter is about gathering information and the second one about make decisions. It’s a bit confusing to me why Keirsey would use Js and Ps instead of Ts and Fs.

There are actually a couple of schools of thought about Myers-Briggs. If you’re not familiar with them it can get really confusing, especially when people start referencing each methodology without naming it assuming you already know what they’re talking about.

While more are springing up, the two most popular ways of understanding Myers-Briggs are Carl Jung’s “cognitive functions” and David Keirsey’s “Four Temperaments.”

Each starts out with the four dichotomies of Myers-Briggs and then branches out to two different roads. So, when you begin a dialog about Keirsey Four Temperaments, you’re (at least temporarily) suspending a conversation about Jungian cognitive functions.

Jungian cognitive functions is the theory that there are eight primary mental processes the brain uses to learn new information and evaluate that information, or make decisions. There are four learning functions (called “perceiving processes), and four decision-making functions (called “judging processes”). Depending upon your Myers-Briggs type, you will have one of the learning processes and one of the decision-making processes as your favorite.

The learning processes are based on the Sensor/iNtuitive dichotomy, with each having an extraverted and an introverted expression, or version of itself. So, the four processes are Introverted Sensing, Extraverted Sensing, Introverted iNtuition and Extraverted iNtuition. The decision-making processes are based on the Thinker/Feeler dichotomy, and they also have an introverted and an extraverted expression. They are Introverted Feeling, Extraverted Feeling, Introverted Thinking and Extraverted Thinking. (Each of these processes correlate to different Genius Styles in the Genius Style Assessment.)

In the Keirsey Four Temperament model, there is no mention of cognitive functions. This is mostly due to Keirsey himself finding cognitive functions to be without much use. Instead, he harkens back to older models which frequently place people into a four quadrant system. You can see strong correlations to the ancient model of Sanguine, Melancholy, Phlegmatic and Choleric types.

This was a good choice on Keirsey’s part – his Keirsey Four Temperament model became one of the most accessible entrances into Myers-Briggs of all time, with his book Please Understand Me outselling even Isabel Briggs-Myer’s book Gifts Differing. Approximately 40 million people have taken the Keirsey Temperament Sorter.

The Keirsey Four Temperaments

SJ, or “The Guardian”

These would be anyone who has tested out as a Sensor and a Judger. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ESTJ, ISTJ, ESFJ, ISFJ. Keirsey describes them as finding a place to belong, to contribute to society, and have a sense of security and confidence in their abilities, is key to the Guardian’s sense of well-being.

SP, or “The Artisan”

These would be anyone who has tested out as a Sensor and a Perceiver. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ESTP, ISTP, ESFP, ISFP. Keirsey describes them as having a life of action and freedom is what makes an Artisan tick and gives them a sense of being alive.

NF, or “The Idealist”

These would be anyone who has tested out as an iNtuitive and a Feeler. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ENFJ, INFJ, ENFP, INFP. Keirsey describes them as seeking to have a life of meaning, to help themselves and others grow to be the best that they can be. They do not want to be a copycat of someone else, but want to be seen as a unique and valuable individual.

NT, or “The Rational”

These would be anyone who has tested out as an iNtuitive and a Thinker. The Myers-Briggs types that qualify are ENTJ, INTJ, ENTP, INTP. Keirsey describes them as the drive towards constantly increasing their knowledge base and being highly competent is what gives Rationals a sense of personal satisfaction.

Why does Keirsey pair together Sensors with the Judger/Perceiver dichotomy, but iNtuitives with the Thinker/Feeler dichotomy?

That’s a great question. I don’t know if I’ve ever read Keirsey explain it (and if you have, please share in the comments!), but I have a theory on why it works.

Sensors understand information primarily using their senses because they are interested in what is reliable and verifiable. That makes them focused on their environment, the world that is accessible through the senses. The Judger/Perceiver dichotomy describes your relationship with your environment. Judgers like their environment to be organized, and Perceivers prefer their environment to be open-frame. (See more in the blog post, “What is a Judger and What is a Perceiver?“)

So, it makes sense that, to a Sensor, their preferred relationship with the environment would be the most influential component. Which gives you SJ and SP.

iNtuitives, on the other hand, understand information in a more conceptual way. They like asking “What if?” questions and speculating on what for the moment may only exist in their imagination. If the question that drives you is “What if?” it’s logical that vetting those ‘what if’ scenarios would be extremely necessary.

So, it makes sense that, to an iNtuitive, the dichotomy that informs how they evaluate information – Thinking or Feeling – becomes the most influential component. Which gives you NT and NF.
If you attempt to find cognitive functions in the Keirsey Four Temperament model, you won’t get very far. While the SP and SJ temperaments allow for shared functions (all SJs use Introverted Sensing, or “Memory” in the Genius System, and all SPs use Extraverted Sensing, or “Sensation”), the same doesn’t apply to the two iNtuitive temperaments. That because you need to know the Judger or Perceiver dichotomy preference to determine cognitive functions.

I think we all have a desire to overlay the models we become familiar with to 1) understand them better and 2) give it a sense of elegance. In the case of Jungian cognitive functions and the Keirsey Four Temperaments, I found it far more helpful to study them on their own first. There WILL be similarities, but there won’t a perfect correlation between the two.


Se - Extroverted Sensing
Extraverted Sensing occurs when we become aware of what is in the physical world in rich detail. We may be drawn to act on what we experience to get an immediate result. We notice relevant facts and occurrences in a sea of data and experiences, learning all the facts we can about the immediate context or area of focus and what goes on in that context. An active seeking of more and more input to get the whole picture may occur until all sources of input have been exhausted or something else captures our attention. Extraverted Sensing is operating when we freely follow exciting physical impulses or instincts as they come up and enjoy the thrill of action in the present moment. A oneness with the physical world and a total absorption may exist as we move, touch, and sense what is around us. The process involves instantly reading cues to see how far we can go in a situation and still get the impact we want or respond to the situation with presence.

Si - Introverted Sensing
Introverted Sensing often involves storing data and information, then comparing and contrasting the current situation with similar ones. The immediate experience or words are instantly linked with the prior experiences, and we register a similarity or a difference—for example, noticing that some food doesn’t taste the same or is saltier than it usually is. Introverted Sensing is also operating when we see someone who reminds us of someone else. Sometimes a feeling associated with the recalled image comes into our awareness along with the information itself. Then the image can be so strong, our body responds as if reliving the experience. The process also involves reviewing the past to draw on the lessons of history, hindsight, and experience. With introverted Sensing, there is often great attention to detail and getting a clear picture of goals and objectives and what is to happen. There can be a oneness with ageless customs that help sustain civilization and culture and protect what is known and long-lasting, even while what is reliable changes.

Ne - Extroverted Intuiting
Extraverted iNtuiting involves noticing hidden meanings and interpreting them, often entertaining a wealth of possible interpretations from just one idea or interpreting what someone’s behavior really means. It also involves seeing things “as if,” with various possible representations of reality. Using this process, we can juggle many different ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and meanings in our mind at once with the possibility that they are all true. This is like weaving themes and threads together. We don’t know the weave until a thought thread appears or is drawn out in the interaction of thoughts, often brought in from other contexts. Thus a strategy or concept often emerges from the here-and-now interactions, not appearing as a whole beforehand. Using this process we can really appreciate brainstorming and trust what emerges, enjoying imaginative play with scenarios and combining possibilities, using a kind of cross-contextual thinking. Extraverted iNtuiting also can involve catalyzing people and extemporaneously shaping situations, spreading an atmosphere of change through emergent leadership.

Ni - Introverted Intuiting
Introverted iNtuiting involves synthesizing the seemingly paradoxical or contradictory, which takes understanding to a new level. Using this process, we can have moments when completely new, unimagined realizations come to us. A disengagement from interactions in the room occurs, followed by a sudden “Aha!” or “That’s it!” The sense of the future and the realizations that come from introverted iNtuiting have a sureness and an imperative quality that seem to demand action and help us stay focused on fulfilling our vision or dream of how things will be in the future. Using this process, we might rely on a focal device or symbolic action to predict, enlighten, or transform. We could find ourselves laying out how the future will unfold based on unseen trends and telling signs. This process can involve working out complex concepts or systems of thinking or conceiving of symbolic or novel ways to understand things that are universal. It can lead to creating transcendent experiences or solutions.

Te - Extroverted Thinking
Contingency planning, scheduling, and quantifying utilize the process of extraverted Thinking. Extraverted Thinking helps us organize our environment and ideas through charts, tables, graphs, flow charts, outlines, and so on. At its most sophisticated, this process is about organizing and monitoring people and things to work efficiently and productively. Empirical thinking is at the core of extraverted Thinking when we challenge someone’s ideas based on the logic of the facts in front of us or lay out reasonable explanations for decisions or conclusions made, often trying to establish order in someone else’s thought process. In written or verbal communication, extraverted Thinking helps us easily follow someone else’s logic, sequence, or organization. It also helps us notice when something is missing, like when someone says he or she is going to talk about four topics and talks about only three. In general, it allows us to compartmentalize many aspects of our lives so we can do what is necessary to accomplish our objectives.

Ti - Introverted Thinking
Introverted Thinking often involves finding just the right word to clearly express an idea concisely, crisply, and to the point. Using introverted Thinking is like having an internal sense of the essential qualities of something, noticing the fine distinctions that make it what it is and then naming it. It also involves an internal reasoning process of deriving subcategories of classes and sub-principles of general principles. These can then be used in problem solving, analysis, and refining of a product or an idea. This process is evidenced in behaviors like taking things or ideas apart to figure out how they work. The analysis involves looking at different sides of an issue and seeing where there is inconsistency. In so doing, we search for a “leverage point” that will fix problems with the least amount of effort or damage to the system. We engage in this process when we notice logical inconsistencies between statements and frameworks, using a model to evaluate the likely accuracy of what’s observed.

Fe - Extroverted Feeling
The process of extraverted Feeling often involves a desire to connect with (or disconnect from) others and is often evidenced by expressions of warmth (or displeasure) and self-disclosure. The “social graces,” such as being polite, being nice, being friendly, being considerate, and being appropriate, often revolve around the process of extraverted Feeling. Keeping in touch, laughing at jokes when others laugh, and trying to get people to act kindly to each other also involve extraverted Feeling. Using this process, we respond according to expressed or even unexpressed wants and needs of others. We may ask people what they want or need or self-disclose to prompt them to talk more about themselves. This often sparks conversation and lets us know more about them so we can better adjust our behavior to them. Often with this process, we feel pulled to be responsible and take care of others’ feelings, sometimes to the point of not separating our feelings from theirs. We may recognize and adhere to shared values, feelings, and social norms to get along.

Fi - Introverted Feeling
It is often hard to assign words to the values used to make introverted Feeling judgments since they are often associated with images, feeling tones, and gut reactions more than words. As a cognitive process, it often serves as a filter for information that matches what is valued, wanted, or worth believing in. There can be a continual weighing of the situational worth or importance of everything and a patient balancing of the core issues of peace and conflict in life’s situations. We engage in the process of introverted Feeling when a value is compromised and we think, “Sometimes, some things just have to be said.” On the other hand, most of the time this process works “in private” and is expressed through actions. It helps us know when people are being fake or insincere or if they are basically good. It is like having an internal sense of the “essence” of a person or a project and reading fine distinctions among feeling tones.


What You Need To Know About The 8 Cognitive Functions

One of the most influential psychoanalysts of our time, Carl Jung , spent a great deal of his life trying to map out our unique cognitive functions and how they shape our personalities.

Carl Jung described cognitive functions as: “particular mental processes -or attitudes- within a person’s psyche that are present regardless of common circumstance.”

In other words, they are your a set of mental processes -or behaviors- that you dominantly act upon when making decisions.

You are probably asking yourself, “ok Mindvalley, that’s all good and dandy, but what do I do with this information?”

Well here’s the baseline of it all…


I always thought behaviourism could be debunked fairly easily, it was a whole trend which I believe was based upon a pretty vulgar and militant interpretation of scientific research contra more speculative models, although the fate of psychoanalysis and behaviourism and then alternatives arising afterwards could be considered a vindication of Marx's reinterpretation of Hegel, ie the whole thesis, antithesis, new thesis. That conflict's necessary.

I just think that there's always the capacity for backsliding into what behaviourism was, that "species of animal", I really believe that Dawkins and others are of that breed and they do serious violence to research methodologies and theorising when they manage to exercise influence.

Member Join Date Sep 2011 Posts 37

Originally Posted by iauiugu

Emedia is not better than print, it is that the content of emedia is print. So emedia is our new environment, just as print was once our new environment.

The principle is that any new environment contains the previous environment as content.

And an interesting corollary is that any new environment is invisible, so we focus on the old environment as content.

Also any new environment numbs us so it can go about changing the sense ratios of our psyche.

Member Join Date May 2012 MBTI infj Enneagram 415 Posts 46

Originally Posted by highlander

You have that backwards. As discussed at length in this long INTJforum post (which I've already linked to), if you read Gifts Differing with any care, and you read the MBTI Manuals and other official MBTI materials, and you look at the decades of MBTI studies that have centered around the dichotomies and ignored the cognitive functions, and you look at the more recent "Step II" version of the MBTI — which divides the dichotomies into facets and continues to all but ignore the functions — you'll realize that, after putting Jung's original type concepts to the test, Myers came to the conclusion (correctly) that the dichotomies were the true building blocks of type. Myers essentially did nothing with the purported "tertiary" and "inferior" functions, and mostly just gave lip service to the dominant and auxiliary functions. Not only the test, but the MBTI itself, is really built around the dichotomies.

And the dichotomy-centric version of the MBTI doesn't exclude the many aspects of personality associated with preference combinations — e.g., things that NFs or NPs or FPs tend to have in common. And there's no question that descriptions of, say, "Fe" can actually have validity as well as long as they don't go beyond what you might call the piggybacked validity that they get from lining up with the additive effects of the two (or three, as applicable) corresponding dichotomies — e.g., FJ (or EFJ, depending) for "Fe" descriptions.

But it's also worth noting that Myers believed that NF/NT/SF/ST were the most significant preference combinations — more than any of the combinations associated with the functions. And the second edition of the MBTI Manual (which Myers co-authored) had a brief description of characteristics associated with every one of the 24 possible two-letter preference combinations.

Links in INTJforum posts don't work if you're not a member, so here are replacements for two of the links in the post linked above:

Senior Member Join Date Jul 2013 MBTI INTJ Enneagram 5 Posts 657


Watch the video: Why You Should Learn About Carl Jungs Theory of Cognitive Functions - MBTI (May 2022).


Comments:

  1. Nye

    Anyone can be

  2. Fet

    What necessary words ... Great, a great idea

  3. Kagale

    I apologize for interrupting you, but I need a little more information.

  4. Evian

    What words ... the phenomenal idea, excellent

  5. Orvin

    What an interesting phrase



Write a message