# The 8 Functions, for the Visual Thinker



## psynite (Feb 7, 2011)

This is based on the article that was written byhttp://personalitycafe.com/articles/51137-4-perceiving-functions-box.html , so go read that first. 

In that article, he described the perceiving functions in relation to the “box”. This made me get to thinking of the relationship between the all the functions in box, and how it could be shown visually. The most important thing is the dual relationship between the extraverted and introverted rational and irrational functions, which will help build the model for each of the types. Basing off of the box idea in the other article, I will explain the way that each function acts in the relation to the box, the box being the individuals current perceptions and mindset.

Ni – This is the box framing function. In relation to the “reality box”, in dominant Ni users, the frames can extend out of the “reality box” and bend in multiple ways. Ni users have the ability to frame things in new and interesting ways, creating hypothetical (Se) points in the shaped frames to predict, giving the visionary and forward thinking image of the INJ’s. Although, without a spread of real Se points, the plausibility of the Ni prediction isn’t as good as it could be. In the Ni-Se relationship, the Ni gives the subjective exploratory structure.

Se – This is the single point function. Dominant Se operates by creating as many points as possible, some are inside the box, and some aren’t. The power of Se is that they know they need to experience many things, and so they have a better distribution of Se points in their box than Ni dominants. In the Se-Ni relationship, the Ni framing function is more simplistic, the skill in changing the frame isn’t as developed like the Ni dominant, but makes up for it in the number of Se points. The simplicity of the Ni means that Se dominants may frame things with simpler shapes, lacking the finesse in prediction ability of the Ni dominant. In the Ni-Se relationship, the Se is the objective content.

Si – This is the webbed function. Si is much like Ni that it is based on defining the “box” of perceptions. Although instead of the overlapping frames, it creates itself a web of connected points, a mass really that aims to fill in the “box of reality”. The Si is often associated with being conservative because of this filling of the box, but gives them (arguably) the most stable thought processes, because they aren’t continuously looking to extend out. In this way they can predict with anything that has fallen under the umbrella of their Si, anything new is added one connection at a time to the Si mass with short exploratory Ne trees to expand their “box of reality”. In the Si-Ne relationship, the Si is the subjective structure. 

Ne – This is the exploratory function. This could be pictured as a growing tree resembling a bonsai tree, from a single Si point, branching out extending as far it can while maintaining the entire tree. This tree like structure is always tentative, which means that the trees are like antenna seeking out an entire picture, and only when it has seen enough, does the tree hard-wire into Si webs. If represented by a drawing, Ne dominance would look like a small mass of Si, with Ne trees extending out sort of like a porcupine in a ball. This shows the lack of structure in ENxP’s, because the trees extend out so far from the Si base, they will have great insight into things, but unless they continuously explore, they won’t be able to give their perceptions real structural security (i.e. enlarging the base Si). In the Si-Ne relationship, the Ne is the objective exploratory content.

Hopefully you have a clear image of what these would look like in relation to each other. The box system of Ni-Se, and the web/tree system of Si-Ne. What comes next is how the judging functions act in relation to each of these. The judging functions act as the judges of what is the right order of thoughts and what is relevant. The judging functions are the rational ones, so what they provide are order to the irrational perceptions. 

Te and Fe – These are the functions that choose what is relevant to the current thoughts. Basically, these functions are the ones that in the Ni-Se frame system choose which frames are important. In the Si-Ne web system, it would choose which sections of the web are important. In the visual representation, it would just look like sections of the web or frames getting “lit” up. In the dominant Te and Fe individuals, relevance to the objective values/facts is paramount to anything. So they build their internal system with what matters in mind, the frames/webs are built if they matter to the objective values/facts. This might give the ExxJ’s natural organizational abilities, because their own subjective organizational tool (Ti and Fi) are inferior, they rely on the structure provided by the world. 

Fi and Ti – These create the inner hierarchy of the mind, based on value or logic. This determines the thought progression of the individual. It chooses which frames/webs, from those that are relevant (determined by Fe/Te), and orders them in a way that is rational to the individual. Visually, these would be lines moving from the initial Ni frame or Si point, activating along related frames or web sections in order of their importance to the current mental stimulus. In Fi and Ti dominants, determining what is important is paramount to anything. (Side note: Fi and Ti are all based on values or logic from the environment, but used to organize their thoughts instead of what is relevant) In Fi dominants, for example, their Fi value hierarchy is much more sophisticated than their ability to determine what is factually relevant (Te) to the stimulus. This leads to complicated and deep emotional/logical hierarchies, which might explain why INTP’s are at home with very detail-oriented logical systems, like computers, and INFP’s describe themselves as having very vivid inner fantasy worlds.

Putting all these elements together, it is easier (I hope, anyways) to see how the functions interact, and how some of the stereotyped issues each type has arises. I hope this makes the functions clearer and the descriptions aren’t as vague. I left out some details, so any questions, comments or praiselaughing is welcome.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

I think this article she copied does a great job with the box symbols. I just spent a long while on them lol. I'll be back.

http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive-functions/9813-mbti-functions-explained.html


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

Shit, I didn't even paste the article I was talking about until now, sorry about that.


----------



## psynite (Feb 7, 2011)

Souled In said:


> Shit, I didn't even paste the article I was talking about until now, sorry about that.


That is very interesting. I think I have seen that link before, when I first came across MBTI, maybe I have just full circle with it. I like the way they described the F and T functions.


----------



## Up and Away (Mar 5, 2011)

psynite said:


> That is very interesting. I think I have seen that link before, when I first came across MBTI, maybe I have just full circle with it. I like the way they described the F and T functions.


I finally understand it somewhat. Its interesting that they are saying F is more holistic, and T following some objective path. In that respect, it makes sense how we can all have a bit of both.


----------



## psynite (Feb 7, 2011)

Souled In said:


> I finally understand it somewhat. Its interesting that they are saying F is more holistic, and T following some objective path. In that respect, it makes sense how we can all have a bit of both.


I took a closer look at it. It almost exactly the same idea.... Describing F as holistic is interesting, but it can only be seen in terms of people relations, I don't know how it can be used otherwise. I envisioned Fi and Ti as hierarchy creators, where the Fi orders the objective environment by what are the important social values. In the way that the article stated that F was holistic and T was linear seemed a little off to me, because I can only see F as holistic under the assumption that it is socially holistic. T is linear, but I would think that Fi is linear but with what the person values, and Ti is linear with the environmental facts. 

I can only ask someone with dominant Fi, like yourself, if Fi is sequential with their values. If what you believe in regards to people relations checks the new ideas, starting from the strongest values to the weakest. Like when a new idea comes to you, do you decide on how you will take the idea depending on all your values at one time, or start with the strongest and move to the weakest?


----------

