Cognitive Function Ranges

[VH]

I've mentioned this theory before, but I have recently developed more insight on it.

I think the cognitive functions are more like ranges than boxes. They range from the highly micro (introverted) to the highly macro (extroverted). For example, Intuition ranges from Ni to Ne, with a perfectly ambiverted point in the middle. All of the functions range in this way.

Our capacity with these functions increases and decreases across the range, creating something looks like the following graph (a rough estimate of my own capacities across the range).

View attachment 2664

Notice how the dominant function (Feeling) isn't always the most developed function across the range, but it has overall more development. As each function follows behind, the spikes get thinner and less numerous, losing mass with each preference progression. In this example, the secondary function (Intuition) has a few spikes of development that exceed the development of the dominant function, but the overall development in this function is less than the dominant. The same is true for the tertiary function (Sensing) but more drastic, and even more drastic for the inferior function (Thinking) because we develop these functions only so much as we have to and tend to focus only on specific areas, unlike our dominant and secondary functions which we constantly use.

 

[jn56uytrx]

I've mentioned this theory before, but I have recently developed more insight on it.

I think the cognitive functions are more like ranges than boxes. They range from the highly micro (introverted) to the highly macro (extroverted). For example, Intuition ranges from Ni to Ne, with a perfectly ambiverted point in the middle. All of the functions range in this way.

Our capacity with these functions increases and decreases across the range, creating something looks like the following graph (a rough estimate of my own capacities across the range).

View attachment 2664

Notice how the dominant function (Feeling) isn't always the most developed function across the range, but it has overall more development. As each function follows behind, the spikes get thinner and less numerous, losing mass with each preference progression. In this example, the secondary function (Intuition) has a few spikes of development that exceed the development of the dominant function, but the overall development in this function is less than the dominant. The same is true for the tertiary function (Sensing) but more drastic, and even more drastic for the inferior function (Thinking) because we develop these functions only so much as we have to and tend to focus only on specific areas, unlike our dominant and secondary functions which we constantly use.

I like this. It makes sense to me, at least at first glance. Makes me want to do some sort of self-assessment to see what my graph would look like. Got any plans for further development in that way?

 

[Sparkz]

Wow, very interesting. It makes sense. I like this a lot. I don't know how you could develop this more, but if you think you can you should.

 

[VH]

I like this. It makes sense to me, at least at first glance. Makes me want to do some sort of self-assessment to see what my graph would look like. Got any plans for further development in that way?

Thanks.

I'm not exactly sure how I would go about it. However, this concept might be worth investigating, researching, and eventually developing.

I suppose a simpler version of it could be developed by rating the percentage of various functions in any given activity, a series of questions that have polar comparisons on a scale. For instance, a Thinking question that pits a completely Ti response vs a completely Te response, with a sliding scale between them (to pinpoint the left/right position on the graph), then a strength of response scale (to indicate the up/down strength on the graph). Ten questions each for N, S, T, F would make a 40 question test. Problem is, the more complicated a test is, the more likely there will be user error in self assessment.

This method would generate a result that looks like this...

View attachment 2670

Might be something to think about though...

 

[VH]

Okay, for anyone who is interested, I whipped up a quick temporary test based on the questions in the Mental Muscle Diagram Test.

Quote the following and place a number (1 through 5) between each of the questions to indicate who important these questions are to you (1 Not much at all, 5 Extremely important).

Having a well-prepared plan is what matters most
o
o
o
o
o
Thinking logically is what matters most

I dislike it when there is chaos around me
o
o
o
o
o
I dislike incoherent theories

I feel satisfied when others follow the right processes
o
o
o
o
o
I feel very satisfied by figuring out for myself how something works

ugh... this is a lot more work than I thought... I'll come back and finish this later.