Cognitive Confusion

It seems that sometimes people lose track of what the functions actually imply. Let me quote the originator.

"Sensing tells you that something exists; thinking tells you what it is; feeling tells you whether it is agreeable or not; and intuition tells you whence it comes and where it is going." - C. G. Jung



All of the cognitive functions are forms of intelligence. Keep this in mind. Sensing and Feeling are just as much forms of intelligence as Intuition and Thinking. Each cognitive function is an index of how we apply intelligence.

The Perception functions are an index of how we process input, not just how we take it in. Ni, Ne, Si, and even Se are the processes by which all sensory input is cataloged in our minds. These functions are essentially our filing systems, and we use a great deal of intelligence in how we discern and classify our perceptions.

Si stores information much like a computer, with file folders and accurate records.

Se absorbs information much like a video camera, in real time and high definition.

Ne files information like a search engine, with links that link to other links, often involuntarily.

Ni tethers input by pattern, relative to other patterns.

The Judging functions are the manner in which we reason. There is a tendency to assume that the Feeling functions do not reason, but instead emote. That's not at all accurate. All of the Judging functions are analytical.

Ti processes information logically on a micro scale.

Te analyzes information by how it relates on a macro scale.

Fi reacts to information qualitatively on an abstract level.

Fe engages information idealistically on a philosophical level.

It is these preferences that make up the quality of a person's intelligence, but they are not at all indicative of the quantity of a person's intelligence. There are people with extremely high IQs (140+) from all 16 of the Jungian personality types.

Please keep this in mind when considering the cognitive functions, personality types, and the implications they bring.

 

Actually, that sounds more like Ni, which sees patterns that others don't. Ni statements are prone to causing non-Ni people to wonder how in the world what we just said has any relevance to the subject at hand - because they can't see the pattern like we can.

Some standard reactions to Ni...

"What planet do you come from?"
"Have you heard anything that has been said?"
"Are you stupid?"
*blink blink*
and my personal favorite... when someone catches up with us... "BRILLIANT!"

Ne, on the other hand is notorious for needing to be reigned back in. Ne users are frequently told to stay on track, but seldom make such large leaps of logic that people can't see where they went. Ne causes tangents, but tangents that generally have a visible, but not always viable segue. This is also why Ne is often funny, because it's a quick jump to the unexpected as opposed to a long jump into the unknown.

Some standard reactions to Ne...

"Would you be serious?"
"Let's get back to reality."
"Why do you insist on offering these wacky hair brained notions?"
"BWAHAHAHAHAHA!"
and my personal favorite... when someone catches us with them... "Holy crap, that just might work!"

 

Always glad to help!

 

Well, there are eight functions...

And they were developed like this...

Cognition is a process of Perception and Judgment.

Some people are much more in the here and now, while others make leaps of logic as they perceive. Thus Perception was broken into S and N.

Some people are more emotional and philosophical, while others are more rational and pensive. Thus, Judgment was broken into F and T.

However, after some study, it was obvious that each of these functions had two sides to them, an internally and an externally focused side. Thus, all of the functions were split into Se, Si, Ne, Ni, Fe, Fi, Te, and Ti.

It didn't take long to deduce that most people focused on one over the other. And once this was noticed, the pattern of an introverted and extroverted J and P pair became evident, which is the basis for the Jungian archetypes.

Two things to take into consideration about the theories on cognitive functions...

1. It took many years of focused observation, study, and research to make all of these steps and leaps of logic that built upon one another. It certainly didn't just pop out of one brainstorming session.

2. Jung's original personality archetypes only included a dominant and secondary function. All the other functions were added later by other psychologist, such as Beebe. For example, Jung's version of INFJ was simply Ni Fe, because Jung presumed that everyone used all 8 of the functions at varying degrees. The only determining factor in personality via cognitive functions as far as Jung was concerned was which J and P functions does someone inherrently use first. Now that we have tests to isolate function preference, it turns out that Jung was more correct than not. The model that extrapolates types into a string of functions - such as INFJ being Ni > Fe > Ti > Se > Ne > Fi > Te > Si came well after Jung and is only an accepted pattern of 'norms' - by no means a rule. In other words, Jung pioneered these theories, but by no means figured it all out in his time.

 

Actually... I was considering this last night... sort of. I'm thinking of writing an entire manual on the subject of personality type and the Jungian theory behind it. Anyone care to help me organize it?

 

These are the most distilled descriptions I could come up with. I deliberately used as few words as possible. Those were the best I could come up with.

Traditionally, it is accepted that Fi is a right brained thought process - hence abstract. Fe is accepted to be a left brained thought process - hence philosophical. Also, Fi and Fe are respectively micro and macro scale.

Analysis is inductive. Processing is deductive. Te analyzes and induces much more effectively than Ti. Ti processes detailed information and deduces more effectively than Te. Meanwhile, Te doesn't process the inner workings of something as well as Ti, and Ti doesn't associate the relationships of what it ponders as well as Te.

For example...

Fi: Throwing this ball up in the air and catching it when it comes back down is fun and makes me happy, because I'm really good at it!

Ti: That's Newton's Law. Everything that goes up must come down. And so, if you kick the ball up, it must come down. The rate at which it comes down can be measured using the following formula, and barring air resistance, we can determine how much force the ball will hit the ground with if we know how high the ball was when it began falling back down, and how much it weighs.

Te: I've noticed previously that every time I kick a ball up, it comes back down, so I guess this next time when I kick it up, it will come back down, too. When it comes down, it always bounces in some direction, therefore if it bounces in that direction it will likely break something. I will probably get in trouble if that happens, so I'm not going to throw the ball here.

Fe: If the ball breaks something that someone cares about, that will make them unhappy, and most importantly, that will make them unhappy with me. I would be less happy about that than throwing the ball is making me happy, so I'm going to throw the ball somewhere that makes everyone happy, including me.