Theory on Cognitive Function Capacity as "IQ"

[VH]

I've been considering that since IQ is in essence cognition, and the cognitive functions are components of overall cognition, then it stands to reason that a person's IQ is essentially made up of how well developed and used their cognitive functions are. Therefore, it is possible to measure individual cognitive functions on the same scale as the IQ. (Though I have no idea how to create a test... but it's possible)

That being the case, lets compare an average INFJ (opaque in the front) to an exceptionally intelligent ESTP (transparent rear set of bars).

View attachment 7995

The INFJ has about a 120 Ni, 110 Fe, 105 Ti, and 90 Se... which would all average out to somewhere around a 110 IQ.

The ESTP has about 125 Ni, 130 Fe, 135 Ti, and 140 Se... which would all average out to somewhere around a 130 IQ. However, it's important to note that the ESTP in this example has better use/development of their inferior function (Ni) than the INFJ has with their dominant function (Ni).

This situation might be responsible for a lot of mistyping by comparison. Person A is an INFJ. Person B's Ni is stronger than Person A's, therefore they must be an INFJ... or Person B's Fe is much stronger than Person A's, therefore Person B must be an ENFJ. Meanwhile, the ESTP in our example is better at being an INFJ than most INFJs (if they choose to use those functions in preference to Se and Ti, which they'd clearly be able to do if a situation called for it) creating a situation where a well developed person is going to have a lot of trouble isolating their type outside of the four functions that they inherently use.

While this might seem to muddy the waters, I think the situation of having well developed cognitive functions to the point that it makes distinguishing type difficult is actually ideal. It means your worst functions are better than most people's best functions, and you're a well balanced individual capable of dealing with whatever life throws at you.

Anyway, just remember this before you dismiss another person's cognitive function capacity because of their type.

 

[justeccentricnotinsane]

I've been considering that since IQ is in essence cognition, and the cognitive functions are components of overall cognition, then it stands to reason that a person's IQ is essentially made up of how well developed and used their cognitive functions are. Therefore, it is possible to measure individual cognitive functions on the same scale as the IQ. (Though I have no idea how to create a test... but it's possible)

That being the case, lets compare an average INFJ (opaque in the front) to an exceptionally intelligent ESTP (transparent rear set of bars).

View attachment 7995

The INFJ has about a 120 Ni, 110 Fe, 105 Ti, and 90 Se... which would all average out to somewhere around a 110 IQ.

The ESTP has about 125 Ni, 130 Fe, 135 Ti, and 140 Se... which would all average out to somewhere around a 130 IQ. However, it's important to note that the ESTP in this example has better use/development of their inferior function (Ni) than the INFJ has with their dominant function (Ni).

This situation might be responsible for a lot of mistyping by comparison. Person A is an INFJ. Person B's Ni is stronger than Person A's, therefore they must be an INFJ... or Person B's Fe is much stronger than Person A's, therefore Person B must be an ENFJ. Meanwhile, the ESTP in our example is better at being an INFJ than most INFJs (if they choose to use those functions in preference to Se and Ti, which they'd clearly be able to do if a situation called for it) creating a situation where a well developed person is going to have a lot of trouble isolating their type outside of the four functions that they inherently use.

While this might seem to muddy the waters, I think the situation of having well developed cognitive functions to the point that it makes distinguishing type difficult is actually ideal. It means your worst functions are better than most people's best functions, and you're a well balanced individual capable of dealing with whatever life throws at you.

Anyway, just remember this before you dismiss another person's cognitive function capacity because of their type.

The principle behind this - that some people's cognitive functions can be better developed - I think has merit, along with your suggestion that it may make it more difficult to type. However, I'd be careful applying it to the IQ theory of intelligence, as this tends to test very different things. Intelligence is very genetic, though it can be developed in early life, and is somewhat outside of personality. It is essentially a measure of how our neurons are making connections - how fast they can do so, whether they do so easily. This does not seem, to me, to be the case in the development of personality (or cognitive functions). The development of these functions appears to me to be to do with experience. That ones functions develop as more information is fed in. They are simply filters for information and it would seem to be that these filters would refine themselves as they go along. Thus developing them. Whereas intelligence (IQ-test intelligence, rather) tends to stand still after a certain age, once our neurons have connected where they will. To learn something new does require new activity within these neurons but this is the building of knowledge, not intelligence, which are very separate things. Intelligence is essentially measured on the ability to learn rapidly and the ability to transfer knowledge - see how a pattern seen in one example is related to an unseen sample. You could argue that the use of certain functions (perhaps N functions more than S ones) could make this process easier, though I am very tentative to say that.

 

[Radiantshadow]

How could someone other than the dominant of a function have a stronger control of the function? I am curious. Types are different because of the function order, dominant will always be used best and most preferably. An INTP's inferior Fe does not become an INFJ's secondary Fe no matter how well used, for example. It's still the inferior, very draining, and rough to align with dominant Ti.

Cognitive functions simply makes interfacing with life easier, eventually creating a well-greased and efficient machine with discernibly inter-related parts that complement each other instead of being at odds (developed vs. undeveloped). Unless I misunderstood what you said? Slightly confused.

That said, making assumptions about anything (especially people) is silly. I think most of the stereotypes evolve out of the type descriptions given out on the Internet, here for example (you'd think we're saints after reading this), that create an idyllic and immature version of the types based on the manifestation of only the top two functions.

I remember reading a link saying something to the effect of a positive relationship between IQ and the proportion of Intuitives over Sensors (higher IQ = more Intuitives than Sensors). I'm not sure if I agree with that, though. High IQ scores mean relatively little aside from being able to take an IQ test, much like some countries are conditioned to be better at standardized tests than others.

 

[Sunkmanitu Tanka]

I definitely agree with this idea. In fact, I've been considering it myself. Take into consideration what the functions truly stand for. Ti is simply logistic ability. When this shows on IQ tests INTPs and ISTPs are likely to test very high because this is the function they use most heavily. Te is clearly what those with "ADD" lack (concentration and outside organization), Fe might be interpersonal skills, Fi intrapersonal, etc. Intelligence is mearly development of the prefered function. But any type might have well-developed Ti, even as an ENFJ for exampe.

The functions merely symbolize a greater intelligence or development of a certain part of the brain, and whichever functions are stronger result in a type. But I think this could mean there are in between types as well with an intelligent INFJ having strong Ti and not as strong Fe or interpersonal skills. I think there might as well be a type Ni Ti Fe Fi for example. Each function merely represents a specific part of the brain and it's development. I don't think the order of functions is as concrete as myers-briggs seems to make it. Especially considering the fact that intelligent people (whether it be spatial/emotional/linguistic) may be gifted in many areas as you said.

 

[VH]

How could someone other than the dominant of a function have a stronger control of the function? I am curious. Types are different because of the function order, dominant will always be used best and most preferably. An INTP's inferior Fe does not become an INFJ's secondary Fe no matter how well used, for example. It's still the inferior, very draining, and rough to align with dominant Ti.

The order in which we most often prefer to use our functions dictates our personality type.

The degree of development, use, and capacity in any given function does not.

An INTP will most often prefer to use their Fe last - regardless of how well developed their Fe is. It is entirely possible (though unlikely) for an INTP to have a better developed Fe than an ENFJ - especially if the INTP is extremely well developed and the ENFJ is poorly developed. That doesn't change the fact that the INTP prefers to use their Fe least, most of the time. It also doesn't change the fact that the INTP can lead with their Fe in certain instances.

The order in which we prefer our functions often correlates to their development and use, but not always. Assuming that because there is often a correlation that development and use equates to preference can lead to mistyping both individually and comparatively.

 

[Radiantshadow]

The order in which we most often prefer to use our functions dictates our personality type.

The degree of development, use, and capacity in any given function does not.

An INTP will most often prefer to use their Fe last - regardless of how well developed their Fe is. It is entirely possible (though unlikely) for an INTP to have a better developed Fe than an ENFJ - especially if the INTP is extremely well developed and the ENFJ is poorly developed. That doesn't change the fact that the INTP prefers to use their Fe least, most of the time. It also doesn't change the fact that the INTP can lead with their Fe in certain instances.

The order in which we prefer our functions often correlates to their development and use, but not always. Assuming that because there is often a correlation that development and use equates to preference can lead to mistyping both individually and comparatively.

Ah. I stand corrected then (I was using an "all are equal" setting), with something to ponder. Thank you

 

[Carola]

Intelligence is very genetic, though it can be developed in early life, and is somewhat outside of personality. It is essentially a measure of how our neurons are making connections - how fast they can do so, whether they do so easily.[...] Intelligence is essentially measured on the ability to learn rapidly and the ability to transfer knowledge - see how a pattern seen in one example is related to an unseen sample. You could argue that the use of certain functions (perhaps N functions more than S ones) could make this process easier, though I am very tentative to say that.

To me what you describe as intelligence could be related to Pe functions more than the generic '' N''.
Then I have a question : what is exactly meant with '' development'' of a function?

 

[InvisibleJim]

I've been considering that since IQ is in essence cognition.

I think you might be comparing apples and oranges. Even if something correlates it does not identify cause.