Weird cognitive functions results | Page 5 | INFJ Forum

Weird cognitive functions results

Hmmmm not really. You're going to think this is very silly, but I almost got used to the idea that my type is INFx, as if that was a genuine type :sweatsmile:

Imagine the comfort though, you get to have Ni, Ne, Fi, Fe, Ti, Te, Si and Se! All ze functions :sunglasses: But a man without a shadow...

More seriously, I think my confusion comes from the fact that when I get near to finally embracing INFP as natural, I seem to Fe; by contrast, when I get near to I finally (re)embracing INFJ as natural, I seem to Fi. And that doesn't really make sense at all, ha!
Am I remembering properly that you said your dad is an FE user (or parents)?
 
Am I remembering properly that you said your dad is an FE user (or parents)?

Yes, my dad is ENFJ. His Fe is spectacularly obvious. It's impossible not to notice it within a few seconds of meeting him.

My mom is ISFP so the Fe isn't as strong with her ^^
 
I would venture a guess that being raised with someone that uses a primary function that your type doesn't have in their stack does some weird shadow development. My parents are Si/Te and Ti/Se soooo the lower half of my function stack was rewarded and praised. Might be something similar to what you experienced growing up.
 
I think it may be a symptom of the ambiguity of 5 <-> 4 Enneagram. There’s a large gap between these in the diagram and I think this is real rather than just a bit of artistic license. It means we can flip between these two behaviourally as well as just blending them. Of course there’s more to it than that because not all people in this space will have the same ambiguity issue as you with MBTI but it’s worth playing with. I certainly catch myself changing mode between these two E states.

I'm very familiar with that switching as well, John. Though I would say that I am reasonably confident I'm a 4 at this stage. Partly thanks to your insights :)

Regarding the can of worms question of INFJ vs. INFP, a perhaps innocuous remark from a colleague at the last work party struck me, somehow. He just said I was "intense" (he was a little tipsy) and when I asked in what way he said "you just ask a lot of deep questions and when someone answers there are those two piercing eyes looking at them".
 
I would venture a guess that being raised with someone that uses a primary function that your type doesn't have in their stack does some weird shadow development.

Maybe. I've thought about that too. If so, I've been much better at equipping myself with Fe than my INFP brother, though. But perhaps that could be explained by the fact I always maintained a close relationship with my dad whereas he has not. I'm not sure.
 
I think it may be a symptom of the ambiguity of 5 <-> 4 Enneagram. There’s a large gap between these in the diagram and I think this is real rather than just a bit of artistic license. It means we can flip between these two behaviourally as well as just blending them. Of course there’s more to it than that because not all people in this space will have the same ambiguity issue as you with MBTI but it’s worth playing with. I certainly catch myself changing mode between these two E states.
I'm 5w4 toooo
 
Yeah I don't resonate with extrovert. I'm just a socially isolated introvert that's excited to have friends
INFJ's Fe want's to socialize from time to time with people. INFP's Fi want's to deepen the connection with their friends as much as possible.
INFJ/INFP tends to get mixed a lot as well, so a bit of both is normal, you'll most likely will be somewhere in the center of J/P.

If you really wan't to know what you prefer in regards to MBTI type, then strip each letter apart and select them on what you prefer (somewhere in between is ok as well, the extended version of the MBTI test looks in how much you are in the center of a dichotomy / specific letter):

Introversion/Extraversion: Do you get charged up the most when being alone or when you are being with people (not just friends)
Intuition/Sensing: Do you take in a new situation as what it could be (intuition, finding connections and possibilities, eg. the big picture) or what is (using your senses and the facts you already know)
Feeling/Thinking: Do you take a decision on a new situation based on how you feel in this situation or based on how you think of this situation
Judging/Perceiving: Do you have the most security within having structure in your day or are you more a person that goes with the flow of the day

https://www.mbtionline.com/en-US/Ar...he-letters-in-the-Myers-Briggs-test-stand-for
 
I'm 5w4 toooo

If so, this is further indication you're not ENFx. I'd say ENFJ/ENFP type 5 are extremely rare if not nonexistent.
I'm 5w4 toooo
Yes, the great majority of 5W4 are introverts. Most of them are primary or secondary thinking types as well - INFx is consistent with this Enneagram type, but isn't so common as thinkers.

I'm just going to ramble a bit around 5W4 INFJ - it might help you by finding parallels, or on the contrary by finding what is definitely not you. Sorry if I'm repeating anything, but it's best put all together.

From my own experience, one of the problems that INFJs face in confirming their type is that Ni is quite obscure and difficult to comprehend, even if it's your primary. The way it's described isn't necessarily going to be the way a particular individual experiences it, and our encounter with it in others is contaminated by the judging functions they have to use to express it externally. The important thing to understand is that it's a perceptive function - it sees but doesn't evaluate except like our eyes which distinguish form and differentiate one thing from another. It isn't anything like as defined and transparent as sight though - it's more like seeing a landscape from a hill in semi-darkness, with the sun coming in and out from behind clouds and spotlighting different parts of it, sometimes unexpectedly. It certainly isn't a 'nice' function, like Fe tends to be - it isn't nasty either, it's purely neutral, like sight.

As 5W4, you could be an INFJ that has well developed Ni but who has to put quite a lot of effort into using Fe - at the same time being actutely aware of others and their atmosphere from the way that Fe and Ni hair-trigger your apprehension of them very sensitively. That sensitivity doesn't come from Fe but from Ni importing others inside you through Fe and modeling them acutely, so you are very aware of them, feel them intensely. In some situations it can be painful, like a loud noise is painful to someone with sensitive hearing.

5W4 means that if you are INFJ you will spend a lot of time chewing over your insights, thinking them round and round in circles - sometimes this is enjoyable and rewarding, but sometimes, like at 4am some mornings, it's involuntary and can't be switched off and drives you mad. When you get this thinking and intuition linked well to its expression outside youself, you can come up with deep thoughts that may amaze others.
The flip side is that all that think looping may come with a lot of unfocused anxiety.

Inferior Se doesn't mean that we are incapable of crossing the road without getting run over. It does mean that a lot of complex sensation can overwhelm us, while energising other types. If I go to a book or antique fair, particularly if they are in a noisy, busy hall, I just switch off after half an hour - I just can't concentrate any more and find I'm looking at stuff and not seeing it. I'm the same in a noisy bar, or party - after a while I just can't understand what's going on any more and all my input tubes are blocked. This isn't a social problem (though I do find that side stressful too) but purely one of being overcome by all the various stimuli in the environment. Like I said a couple of posts ago, I'm quite capable of finding a load of grazes on my shins with no idea how they got there - it's a pain in the bum because thay take ages to heal up properly and it sometimes looks like I've got leprosy down there lol. Oh yes and my duvet cover keeps trying to bite me when I change the bed, but maybe that's demons rather than inferior Se.

I seem to flip between two different orientations.
On the one hand I can be very analytical, logical and wordy, particularly in writing - and very critical of what I say, so that I may go over it and rework it several times before I'm happy it caught my intention. I'm rarely happy that this process does actually capture my insight but it can be an OK approximation. I can easily overwork something in this mode and lose people in the complications - for me the insight that generated all these words is just a single easy to grasp non-verbal object, but it can't be expressed to others easily in language.
On the other hand I will use an image or a poem or a piece of music, etc, to communicate something, and this gets much closer to what I want to say because these can provide a rich simple symbol that expresses a lot of things in a single expression, just like the insight. When I make a picture or a poem of my own, very often the insight and the image are created together, so these are much closer to my raw inner vision than the wordy explanations can ever be.

I'll leave it there - it's just some ideas for you to play around with.
 
Yes, the great majority of 5W4 are introverts. Most of them are primary or secondary thinking types as well - INFx is consistent with this Enneagram type, but isn't so common as thinkers.

I'm just going to ramble a bit around 5W4 INFJ - it might help you by finding parallels, or on the contrary by finding what is definitely not you. Sorry if I'm repeating anything, but it's best put all together.

From my own experience, one of the problems that INFJs face in confirming their type is that Ni is quite obscure and difficult to comprehend, even if it's your primary. The way it's described isn't necessarily going to be the way a particular individual experiences it, and our encounter with it in others is contaminated by the judging functions they have to use to express it externally. The important thing to understand is that it's a perceptive function - it sees but doesn't evaluate except like our eyes which distinguish form and differentiate one thing from another. It isn't anything like as defined and transparent as sight though - it's more like seeing a landscape from a hill in semi-darkness, with the sun coming in and out from behind clouds and spotlighting different parts of it, sometimes unexpectedly. It certainly isn't a 'nice' function, like Fe tends to be - it isn't nasty either, it's purely neutral, like sight.

As 5W4, you could be an INFJ that has well developed Ni but who has to put quite a lot of effort into using Fe - at the same time being actutely aware of others and their atmosphere from the way that Fe and Ni hair-trigger your apprehension of them very sensitively. That sensitivity doesn't come from Fe but from Ni importing others inside you through Fe and modeling them acutely, so you are very aware of them, feel them intensely. In some situations it can be painful, like a loud noise is painful to someone with sensitive hearing.

5W4 means that if you are INFJ you will spend a lot of time chewing over your insights, thinking them round and round in circles - sometimes this is enjoyable and rewarding, but sometimes, like at 4am some mornings, it's involuntary and can't be switched off and drives you mad. When you get this thinking and intuition linked well to its expression outside youself, you can come up with deep thoughts that may amaze others.
The flip side is that all that think looping may come with a lot of unfocused anxiety.

Inferior Se doesn't mean that we are incapable of crossing the road without getting run over. It does mean that a lot of complex sensation can overwhelm us, while energising other types. If I go to a book or antique fair, particularly if they are in a noisy, busy hall, I just switch off after half an hour - I just can't concentrate any more and find I'm looking at stuff and not seeing it. I'm the same in a noisy bar, or party - after a while I just can't understand what's going on any more and all my input tubes are blocked. This isn't a social problem (though I do find that side stressful too) but purely one of being overcome by all the various stimuli in the environment. Like I said a couple of posts ago, I'm quite capable of finding a load of grazes on my shins with no idea how they got there - it's a pain in the bum because thay take ages to heal up properly and it sometimes looks like I've got leprosy down there lol. Oh yes and my duvet cover keeps trying to bite me when I change the bed, but maybe that's demons rather than inferior Se.

I seem to flip between two different orientations.
On the one hand I can be very analytical, logical and wordy, particularly in writing - and very critical of what I say, so that I may go over it and rework it several times before I'm happy it caught my intention. I'm rarely happy that this process does actually capture my insight but it can be an OK approximation. I can easily overwork something in this mode and lose people in the complications - for me the insight that generated all these words is just a single easy to grasp non-verbal object, but it can't be expressed to others easily in language.
On the other hand I will use an image or a poem or a piece of music, etc, to communicate something, and this gets much closer to what I want to say because these can provide a rich simple symbol that expresses a lot of things in a single expression, just like the insight. When I make a picture or a poem of my own, very often the insight and the image are created together, so these are much closer to my raw inner vision than the wordy explanations can ever be.

I'll leave it there - it's just some ideas for you to play around with.

As expected, absolutely everything you wrote resonates ^^
 
I’m very much on this page. Our inferior is supposed to be the least conscious of all the functions - the one furthest away from our conscious control. The others, the ones not mentioned in our stack, are not as far away as the inferior. Jung warned that attempts to develop conscious control of the inferior can cause psychological harm, based on his experience with his patients. Personally, I used my very obvious inferior Se to help confirm my own primary Ni at a time when I wasn’t quite sure from the literature what it should actually feel like within. E.g. The evidence of the bruises on my shins is quite tangible lol.

Are you sure about this? I think 7th function is the least conscious of all functions - at least in my case.
 
Last edited:
Are you sure about this? I think 7th function is the least conscious of all functions - at least in my case.
Well there seems to be some varient of MBTI that I'm not familiar with that appears to place our inferior in a more accessible position than the functions that aren't included in our stack. This doesn't seem to be consistent with Jungian psychology - one of Jung's motivations for creating his type psychology of the conscious was to help identify his patients' orientations so he could access their unconscious more effectively. He saw the inferior as a function that mediates between the conscious and unconscious parts of our psyche. As well as Jung's Psychological Types, I'm also relying on MBTI sources such as Personality Type by Leonore Thompson, and Beside Ourselves by Leonore Quenk - both these books also treat the inferior as the function most removed from our conscious control.

Thompson in particular expands the stack for each type into 8 layers with the dominant at the top and the inferior at the bottom. Personally, I'm not at all sure it actually makes sense to go into such elaboration because I suspect that our non-preferred functions lack differentiation to a considerable degree compared with our primary and secondary. I do think that the inferior is at the 'South Pole' of these undifferentiated functions and is as important to us as our dominant, because it's through that function we can develop psychic integration and wholeness over our lifetimes - individuation as Jung calls it.

But I don't want to sound too definite here because there much to grasp and understand and I'm no expert. My impression is that MBTI only makes the deepest sense in terms of Jung's psychology of the unconscious and its later developments. It's very rewarding to go into the layman's accounts of this, which gives a deeper context for MBTI.
 
He saw the inferior as a function that mediates between the conscious and unconscious parts of our psyche.
Thompson in particular expands the stack for each type into 8 layers with the dominant at the top and the inferior at the bottom. Personally, I'm not at all sure it actually makes sense to go into such elaboration because I suspect that our non-preferred functions lack differentiation to a considerable degree compared with our primary and secondary. I do think that the inferior is at the 'South Pole' of these undifferentiated functions and is as important to us as our dominant, because it's through that function we can develop psychic integration and wholeness over our lifetimes - individuation as Jung calls it.

@John K , just to be certain, the inferior function is the fourth one, right? (Se in this case). Could you go a bit deeper on that, you got me curious now in this specific part.
 
@John K , just to be certain, the inferior function is the fourth one, right? (Se in this case). Could you go a bit deeper on that, you got me curious now in this specific part.
Yes, the inferior is the fourth one quoted in our stack, the way it's normally expressed. So take INFJ with Ni Dominant, Fe secondary, Ti tertiary and Se inferior. The question then arises - what happens to Ne, Fi, Te and Si? Where do they fit in, because everyone does use all the functions? Some people will class these as shadow functions that are less consciously accessible than our inferior, but this is inconsistent with the sources I described. There can be elaborate structures built around all of these functions for each type, and while they give a good vocabulary for describing complex behaviour, I personally doubt there is real psychological significance in the more complex examples. As an example, Thompson suggests the following for INFJ:
Dominant Ni
Secondary Fe
Alternatives Si
Te
Double Agents Fi
Ne
Tertiary Ti
Inferior Se
She suggests that under some pressure, if our preferred states aren't working, we start to use the Alternatives as well - we are still in a healthy state of mind at this point, but unless we have built up some ability with them they may lead us astray. Under still more pressure we start to lose control a bit and the Double Agents start to emerge. These may help, but they may easily lead us completely off our path and into a full blown inferior grip instead.

This is interesting because it does attempt to explain the way an INFJ relates to all 8 functions - but I don't like the linear representation, and I'm not clear it represents the relative relationships accurately. In particular, tertiary Ti doesn't feel right where it is located. But in any case, it doesn't make sense to me to be this precise about our non-preferred functions, which are probably far more blended together than this in terms of the way we can actually access them.
 
Inferior Se doesn't mean that we are incapable of crossing the road without getting run over. It does mean that a lot of complex sensation can overwhelm us, while energising other types. If I go to a book or antique fair, particularly if they are in a noisy, busy hall, I just switch off after half an hour - I just can't concentrate any more and find I'm looking at stuff and not seeing it. I'm the same in a noisy bar, or party - after a while I just can't understand what's going on any more and all my input tubes are blocked. This isn't a social problem (though I do find that side stressful too) but purely one of being overcome by all the various stimuli in the environment. Like I said a couple of posts ago, I'm quite capable of finding a load of grazes on my shins with no idea how they got there - it's a pain in the bum because thay take ages to heal up properly and it sometimes looks like I've got leprosy down there lol. Oh yes and my duvet cover keeps trying to bite me when I change the bed, but maybe that's demons rather than inferior Se.

I'd be careful about confusing 'neurochemical introversion' with 'inferior Se', since what you describe here should happen to all introverts. By introverts I mean those people with thinner neuronal membranes (hence more sensitive to stimulus) and a preference for acetylcholine over dopamine, &c.

By contrast, liking crowds and 'busy-ness' is one of the clearest indications that one is an extrovert (at least the type of 'neurochemical extrovert' which correlates with ESxx)
 
I'd be careful about confusing 'neurochemical introversion' with 'inferior Se', since what you describe here should happen to all introverts. By introverts I mean those people with thinner neuronal membranes (hence more sensitive to stimulus) and a preference for acetylcholine over dopamine, &c.

By contrast, liking crowds and 'busy-ness' is one of the clearest indications that one is an extrovert (at least the type of 'neurochemical extrovert' which correlates with ESxx)
You would need to explain more about the relationship between neurological chemistry and the manifestations of the MBTI functions before I could comment properly - this isn’t something I have explored in any depth but sounds very interesting. It could well be that the book I’m reading at the moment will give me more info. What I described is purely in terms of mapping the MBTI model onto my own subjective experience of myself. I think this is legitimate within the framework of that model and it’s relationship to Jungian psychology as a whole. I certainly react very differently to heavy Se stimulus compared with ISXPs who seem quite tolerant of heavy impersonal sensory loading in comparison to myself. For example this is the typical type of the coach drivers who I’ve met on touring holidays - these guys can drive forever and stay completely alert and laid back about it long after I’d be completely spaced out.

I am quite skeptical about the relationship between brain chemistry theory and subjective conscious experience. I don’t mean in a negative way, but that there is a large gulf between them that we have hardly begun to bridge yet, so any theory is likely to be superseded over and again. It’s interesting stuff. I wonder will it eventually be possible to change your type by taking a pill? Or something equivalent. There are examples from unfortunate people who have suffered brain damage that suggest this may be possible, at least in principle. It’s the very basis of drug treatment of unhealthy conscious states too of course - not type change but change of metal outlook.
 
You would need to explain more about the relationship between neurological chemistry and the manifestations of the MBTI functions before I could comment properly - this isn’t something I have explored in any depth but sounds very interesting. It could well be that the book I’m reading at the moment will give me more info. What I described is purely in terms of mapping the MBTI model onto my own subjective experience of myself. I think this is legitimate within the framework of that model and it’s relationship to Jungian psychology as a whole. I certainly react very differently to heavy Se stimulus compared with ISXPs who seem quite tolerant of heavy impersonal sensory loading in comparison to myself. For example this is the typical type of the coach drivers who I’ve met on touring holidays - these guys can drive forever and stay completely alert and laid back about it long after I’d be completely spaced out.

I am quite skeptical about the relationship between brain chemistry theory and subjective conscious experience. I don’t mean in a negative way, but that there is a large gulf between them that we have hardly begun to bridge yet, so any theory is likely to be superseded over and again. It’s interesting stuff. I wonder will it eventually be possible to change your type by taking a pill? Or something equivalent. There are examples from unfortunate people who have suffered brain damage that suggest this may be possible, at least in principle. It’s the very basis of drug treatment of unhealthy conscious states too of course - not type change but change of metal outlook.
Can't reply fully here because of my connection issues, but...
I'm just thinking about type in terms of the actual neurology. This article explains one side of it pretty well.

So the theory goes that there are only really IN types and ES types, and that extroverted 'Ns' have just learned to cope with stimulus particularly well, while introverted 'Ss' hare extroverts with social anxiety.

See, if you seek more dopamine than acetylcholine, you're likely to be ES rather than IN, and you can figure this out based upon your preferred lifestyle.

Yes, gimme a sec though because I got to this stuff via an answer on Quora, where the person linked a lot of neurological research and put that in context of MBTI.

If I remember correctly, it was a combination of research on neurotransmitter pathways (dopamine preferred by extroverts; acetylcholine by introverts), and some kind of membrane/coating/something (my memory is failing) around the receptors, with introverts showing less of this and therefore less resistance/more sensitivity to stimuli.

EDIT: Oh yeah, AND (the main bit), that the less of this stuff you had around your neurons meant that you could create abstract structures much more rapidly and as a preference. There was some link made between actual neuronal structures and abstract concepts.

The point she made was that N traits and I traits had the same neurological basis, just as E traits and S traits did. In other words, I and N are the same thing, just as E and S are the same thing.

It's always a bit shaky to extrapolate actual science into MBTI, but the argument she made (and the science to back it up) I found pretty compelling.
 
Yeah, I would agree with this, but I have to say that I've had a bit of a perspective shift recently after reading all that stuff about neurochemical differences between extroverts and introverts.

One thing that was mentioned was how extroverts tend to pursue socially-approved rewards much more strongly because of their craving for dopamine, meaning that the achievement of wealth and status feels much better to an extrovert than it does for an introvert - in fact, it can be the strongest source of satisfaction in their lives. By contrast, introverts wired up to desire acetlycholine (released when in deep contemplation) aren't really moved by such achievements. They aren't 'craved' in the same way an extrovert craves them.

This forced me to take a much more lenient view of the 'vulgar' accumulative behaviours I see extroverts engage in, because it seems much more understandable now that I can grasp how different the reward feels to them, compared with how it feels to me.

I have a very close family member who's entire life is directed towards the accumulation of things - high value, high status symbols of wealth and success. When people compliment her on these things, you can see her beam with a pride barely contained by propriety. She has a 'display' of expensive handbags in her spare room, for example... they are not displayed for their aesthetic characteristics, but literally as treasures. Recently she got a new car - very expensive, very flashy. To me the thing was very vulgar and distasteful, but I complimented her on it anyway because it represented a kind of 'life success' to her, and in fact I'm very supportive about this; supporting her on her own terms. The thing is, without these 'things' to give her life some kind of direction, I'm not sure she'd be able to articulate any other purpose. She needs the trophies and treasures.

I understood this before, but privately it felt yucky to me. However, in reading about the neurochemical differences between E and I, I don't think I feel this anymore. It feels understandable to me now why she might behave like this. This is the power of sympathy sometimes - I can understand, but I don't need to feel; I don't need to empathise, because I can't.

In this context, therefore, I wonder if a lot of life philosophy (written by introverts) is simply an imposition of introvert/acetylcholine values upon people who simply don't function in a way that would allow them to enjoy life without the trophies. That denying them the trophies or their pursuit, even in something as mild as moral teaching, would be something inhumane, therefore.

Now, I'm just pursuing this thought to its natural conclusion (on the extremity of differences between E and I), so I wouldn't like anyone who doesn't know me well enough (regulars to my blog will know) to assume that this is my final judgement on the subject, when it's merely a stage in the development of an opinion.

I'll be honest with you, John, I buy it. It makes sense to me.