# MBTI - each types only uses their 4 cognitive functions



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

I was lurking in another section of PerC when I've noticed a debate going on, about whether *the cognitive functions for each type is about preference* (meaning if you are an INfJ for example, you would still have Fi or other functions even when your main preference is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) or *each type only uses their 4 cognitive functions* (meaning if you are an INFJ for example, you wouldn't have Fi and you'd only have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se).

What is your opinion about this?


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

AriesLilith said:


> I was lurking in another section of PerC when I've noticed a debate going on, about whether *the cognitive functions for each type is about preference* (meaning if you are an INfJ for example, you would still have Fi or other functions even when your main preference is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) or *each type only uses their 4 cognitive functions* (meaning if you are an INFJ for example, you wouldn't have Fi and you'd only have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se).
> 
> What is your opinion about this?


Didn't that thread answer your question? Iirc it had like 3 pages when I checked the last time.


----------



## StunnedFox (Dec 20, 2013)

What does something like "Fe" mean in that stack? Does it mean "that part of feeling which is extraverted", or "a preference for extraverting rather than introverting one's feeling", or something else? It seems to me ludicrous to limit people to only ever orienting a function to one of the two attitudes, but then, plenty of claims associated with the functions side of the theory look rather ridiculous when scrutinised...


----------



## AriesLilith (Jan 6, 2013)

Ixim said:


> Didn't that thread answer your question? Iirc it had like 3 pages when I checked the last time.


They were basically from the same few guys going back and forth (if I remember correctly), so I wanted more inputs from others (and not just INFJs I guess).


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

StunnedFox said:


> What does something like "Fe" mean in that stack? Does it mean "that part of feeling which is extraverted", or "a preference for extraverting rather than introverting one's feeling", or something else? It seems to me ludicrous to limit people to only ever orienting a function to one of the two attitudes, but then, plenty of claims associated with the functions side of the theory look rather ridiculous when scrutinised...


Answer:

It's a FJ at work. Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## Octavarium (Nov 27, 2012)

If each of the eight functions is a distinct process that we can use, it's silly to say that each type can use only four of them. There's absolutely no reason for such a restriction. What would prevent someone who generally uses the Ti process from also using the Fi process? Even if they can't be used simultaneously (and I've heard no convincing reason to think that simultaneous use of Fi and Ti is uniquely problematic, as opposed to simultaneous use of, say, Ti and Ne) that doesn't mean they can't be used by the same person at different times. Are functions even tools or processes that we "use" anyway? Are Fi and Fe really distinct from each other, or are they the same function but in different attitudes, so that there are only four functions anyway? Whatever the functions are, there's no justification for saying that an Fi type can't also use/have Fe; nobody is 100% of anything.


----------



## VagrantFarce (Jul 31, 2015)

I strongly believe each type is defined by the four they are associated with - what is often under-appreciated, I believe, is how the _lack_ of a function helps to illustrate something about a type, and how it might help to clarify how people manage (or don't manage) to get along with each other more easily, especially in times of stress.

I also don't think they're something you "learn" or "get better at", or even "use" - rather, you tune them in or out, depending on your state. Whatever you're "learning" isn't really what the cognitive function is meant to represent. People are just plain different in base cognition, period, period.

Anyway, that's what I think. Feel free to disregard.


----------



## UraniaIsis (Nov 26, 2014)

With regards to opinion, I would be in the preference camp. For example, I don't see how an Fe-user can be concerned about addressing external social matters and yet not have any personal value system (Fi) to base it on. The Fi just takes lower priority in the grand scheme of things until all other functions are exhausted, especially Fe. In the case of INFJs, Ne/Si/Te/Fi just remain as background noise and as a backup cognitive system when certain cognitive variables cause us to go into a conscious cognitive stalemate. I don't see how a person can grow and develop if he or she couldn't observe variables and solve problems from alternate perspectives. That's something a personality with just four cognitive functions just cannot achieve.


----------



## Ksara (Feb 13, 2014)

Yeah each type uses four functions. Sensation, feeling, thinking, intuition. The dominant is most conscious, the inferior mostly unconscious. The other two in between. The functions bend to the attitude of the psyche. If the conscious mind is introverted, then any function when conscious will become introverted. Also the unconscious takes on the opposite attitude so in this case it will be extroverted. Unconscious functions becoming extroverted in attitude. That's my take on Jung do far.

Following this model, saying an Fe dominant has Fe and so doesn't use Fi is incorrect. It's more correct to say the Fe dom uses the feeling function predominantly, and this feeling function takes on an extroverted attitude as it is predominately conscious, but will introvert when unconscious. (can a dominant function be unconscious? I don't see why it couldn't be when focusing on another function but that's speculation on my part).


----------



## floatingpoint (Dec 30, 2015)

I agree with the preference perspective as well. I'm an ENFP, but because my college major was English, I've really had to force myself to utilize Ni over the years. It's not necessarily natural for me to notice subtle themes and symbols that tie novels, plays, and poems together, but I've gotten pretty good at it by now. Similarly, my ENFP roommate is a philosophy major, and so she needs to use a lot of Ti. She took a class called symbolic logic twice because the first time she failed, since that logical way of thinking isn't natural to her. Eventually she figured it out though and is now an incredibly logical, disciplined thinker, to the point where she probably uses her Ti more than she uses Te (which she definitely has but is still developing -- she's only 21 and struggles to bring order to the world). 

I think that our environment has a huge bearing on which functions we're forced to utilize. Ultimately, I believe in the cognitive functions, but unfortunately we're not always fortunate enough to control our environment and what it demands of us. Sometimes we're forced to use functions we're not comfortable with, to use our shadow functions or tertiary or inferior functions.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Fe and Fi are not separate functions. They are the same function oriented around either extroversion or introversion.

A Ti-dom can easily use the Te side of the function, but they won't conclude with a Te conclusion.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

What happened to this stuff?

dominant- leading role
auxiliary- supporting role
tertiary- relief role
inferior- aspirational role
5th - opposing role
6th- critical parent role
7th- deceiving role
8th- delivish role

from The 16 Type Patterns

So each function is used _for a special purpose_... And if you're not using the function for that purpose, you're technically not using it, even if you might be engaging in those behaviors. 

For example, I played soccer when I was younger and occasionally I was good at it, but that doesn't mean I was using Se. Most of time during games I spaced out and daydreamed... if I did anything right, it was mostly by accident... or just by _using my senses_. Since Se is my Aspirational Role, I am actually using it when I take special effort to focus on my environment, clear my head of thoughts, and push myself to do something beyond what feels like my usual limits... and I have a special feeling afterward, of accomplishment and unusual synchronicity with the environment. My motivation to do all that was my acknowledgment of the fact that I usually suck at Se and I should take extra care to do it better. 


Just because you're having personal feelings about something doesn't mean you're _using Fi_. You would only be using Fi if you used it for the specific purpose, according to which position it is on your own particular type stacking.


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

A person with a positive attitude does not have a negative attitude, but does have negative thoughts.


----------



## Plumedoux (Aug 16, 2015)

AriesLilith said:


> I was lurking in another section of PerC when I've noticed a debate going on, about whether *the cognitive functions for each type is about preference* (meaning if you are an INfJ for example, you would still have Fi or other functions even when your main preference is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) or *each type only uses their 4 cognitive functions* (meaning if you are an INFJ for example, you wouldn't have Fi and you'd only have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se).
> 
> What is your opinion about this?


The dominant and secondary function is your valued functions so if you are INFJ, you value Ni and Fe but you can still have a good Ne and Fi. But those are not valued, you disregard them if you prefer.
Now If you score high with introversion, intuition, feeling and judging you will have no problem identify yourself with the 4 cognitive functions stack of the INFJ. 
But if you are confuse about being either a thinker or a feeler, do you believe that your Ti or Te is underdeveloped ? For me this is no sense. 
The 4 cognitive functions stack just work if you are the archetype of the type.


----------



## Anonymous Disaster (Mar 15, 2016)

MBTI only works with the 4 function theory. There are no personal preferences of all functions in MBTI so who are we to question Myers and Briggs? It's their theory after all.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Carl Jung: N, S, T and F are functions and e/i are attitude preferences.

John Beebe or Socionics: Everyone has 8 functions in a stack.

David Keirsey: Functions are too abstract; we should just use dichotomies instead.

Ignorant forum users: you can have strong Ni and weak Ne.



Anonymous Disaster said:


> MBTI only works with the 4 function theory. There are no personal preferences of all functions in MBTI so who are we to question Myers and Briggs? It's their theory after all.


Cognitive functions are Carl Jung's theory. Official MBTI barely even considers functions and there are quite a few MBTI experts who don't believe in functions at all.


----------



## Anonymous Disaster (Mar 15, 2016)

Fried Eggz said:


> Carl Jung: N, S, T and F are functions and e/i are attitude preferences.
> 
> John Beebe or Socionics: Everyone has 8 functions in a stack.
> 
> ...


MBTI does work with functions, it is based on a function theory. The only difference is that MBTI places secondary importance on the function order and the main interest are the dichotomies.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

Anonymous Disaster said:


> MBTI does work with functions, it is based on a function theory. The only difference is that MBTI places secondary importance on the function order and the main interest are the dichotomies.


No it's not based on functions. Carl Jung's function theory was the only one that existed when MBTI was created, and MBTI consistently goes directly against Jungian functions. E.G. Carl Jung's Si was not, and could never be a memory function, but it is in MBTI.


----------



## ctrlfeelings (Feb 5, 2016)

AriesLilith said:


> I was lurking in another section of PerC when I've noticed a debate going on, about whether *the cognitive functions for each type is about preference* (meaning if you are an INfJ for example, you would still have Fi or other functions even when your main preference is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) or *each type only uses their 4 cognitive functions* (meaning if you are an INFJ for example, you wouldn't have Fi and you'd only have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se).
> 
> What is your opinion about this?


Everyone has all the 8 functions. Personality type is the INVOLUNTARY preference (or order) of these functions. 

So for INFJ:
1 Ni
2 Fe
3 Ti
4
5
6
7
8 Se

That is why Se is called Inferior in case of INFJ


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Fried Eggz said:


> No it's not based on functions. Carl Jung's function theory was the only one that existed when MBTI was created, and MBTI consistently goes directly against Jungian functions. E.G. Carl Jung's Si was not, and could never be a memory function, but it is in MBTI.


I think you are assuming that "based on" equals "identical with." Do you think movies that are based on a true story are retelling every detail as it actually happened? 

FWIW, MBTI is indeed based on Jung's Psychological Types. They may have changed some things here and there based on research or whathaveyou, but it is still fundamentally based on these concepts. The focus is primarily on dichotomies, but even the 16 type descriptions are ingrained with function-attitudes (according to the manual, not necessarily the random 3rd party descriptions out there in the wild).


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Fried Eggz said:


> Fe and Fi are not separate functions. They are the same function oriented around either extroversion or introversion.
> 
> A Ti-dom can easily use the Te side of the function, but they won't conclude with a Te conclusion.


Indeed. I see you understand Jung fully now.


----------



## charlie.elliot (Jan 22, 2014)

ctrlfeelings said:


> Everyone has all the 8 functions. Personality type is the INVOLUNTARY preference (or order) of these functions.
> 
> So for INFJ:
> 1 Ni
> ...


why u say that? Se is 4th for INFJ. its relevant to you because you *can* develop it later in life and have it be meaningful to you. in some ways it can become the *most* meaningful function because you've struggled for it. whereas 5th- 8th are just much less meaningful.


----------



## The Dude (May 20, 2010)

AriesLilith said:


> I was lurking in another section of PerC when I've noticed a debate going on, about whether *the cognitive functions for each type is about preference* (meaning if you are an INfJ for example, you would still have Fi or other functions even when your main preference is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) or *each type only uses their 4 cognitive functions* (meaning if you are an INFJ for example, you wouldn't have Fi and you'd only have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se).
> 
> What is your opinion about this?


In the MBTI, yeah, but the MBTI is something that was ignored by Jung (in the late 1940's or some time in the 1950's Myers wanted some feedback from Jung...he basically ignored her) so who really cares? It's pretty much on par with a Buzzfeed or Playbuzz quiz. 

The truth is that in systems like Socionics and the 8 Function Model all of the functions play a role which is why it is deeper and in my opinion the systems to go to if you want a type. With that stated, I don't think any form of typology is better than trait based theories, especially the Five Factor Model aka The Big 5.


----------



## Anonymous Disaster (Mar 15, 2016)

Fried Eggz said:


> No it's not based on functions. Carl Jung's function theory was the only one that existed when MBTI was created, and MBTI consistently goes directly against Jungian functions. E.G. Carl Jung's Si was not, and could never be a memory function, but it is in MBTI.


They definitely changed the descriptions to fit their theory batter, but so did socionics and both are based on Jung's work.


----------



## Valtire (Jan 1, 2014)

PaladinX said:


> I think you are assuming that "based on" equals "identical with." Do you think movies that are based on a true story are retelling every detail as it actually happened?
> 
> FWIW, MBTI is indeed based on Jung's Psychological Types. They may have changed some things here and there based on research or whathaveyou, but it is still fundamentally based on these concepts. The focus is primarily on dichotomies, but even the 16 type descriptions are ingrained with function-attitudes (according to the manual, not necessarily the random 3rd party descriptions out there in the wild).


Using your analogy, that would be like saying the little mermaid is based on Jack the Ripper. Si being a memory function is not based on Jung in any way.



Ixim said:


> Indeed. I see you understand Jung fully now.


It's been years since I first started saying that, so you must have a seriously good memory.



Anonymous Disaster said:


> They definitely changed the descriptions to fit their theory batter, but so did socionics and both are based on Jung's work.


Socionics functions don't contradict Jung, they are an expansion upon it. MBTI's functions consistently go directly against him.


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Fried Eggz said:


> Using your analogy, that would be like saying the little mermaid is based on Jack the Ripper. Si being a memory function is not based on Jung in any way.
> 
> 
> It's been years since I first started saying that, so you must have a seriously good memory.
> ...


I've a good memory, but I can't track everyone yo!


----------



## PaladinX (Feb 20, 2013)

Fried Eggz said:


> Using your analogy, that would be like saying the little mermaid is based on Jack the Ripper. Si being a memory function is not based on Jung in any way.


False equivalence.

Why do you think MBTI asserts that Si is a memory function? Do you have any other examples that demonstrate how MBTI's functions consistently go directly against Jung?


----------



## Ixim (Jun 19, 2013)

Besides, Si is not or rather should not be about mere memory recall. It is about the active use of previous made mistakes / successes so as to guide you towards the achievment.

Look, you've got Eidetic memory individuals who keep repeating mistakes over and over and over again. Then you've got simpletons who can't remember what was it exactly that they ate yesterday who almost never make the same mistake twice.

...see what I'm after?


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Just cause the attitude is different doesn't mean it's a different function: feeling is feeling, thinking is thinking, intuition is intuition, sensation is sensation. The mbtiers disagree though they think Ti is in the back of your head and Te is in the front, a complete mess


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

AriesLilith said:


> I was lurking in another section of PerC when I've noticed a debate going on, about whether *the cognitive functions for each type is about preference* (meaning if you are an INfJ for example, you would still have Fi or other functions even when your main preference is Ni-Fe-Ti-Se) or *each type only uses their 4 cognitive functions* (meaning if you are an INFJ for example, you wouldn't have Fi and you'd only have Ni-Fe-Ti-Se).
> 
> What is your opinion about this?


Pod'Lair research shows that only 4 conscious powers show up as physiological cues and only these 4 can be accessed directly. The rest is unconscious and can't be accessed directly but still has major influence on the psyche.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Felipe said:


> Just cause the attitude is different doesn't mean it's a different function: feeling is feeling, thinking is thinking, intuition is intuition, sensation is sensation. The mbtiers disagree though they think Ti is in the back of your head and Te is in the front, a complete mess


They are different things. Te tries to represent Zyy which is a dynamics mover, while Ti tries to represent Zai which is a compass.

Power of Zyy
Power of Zai

Looking at MBTI alone, When there's a difference between for example INFJ and INTJ, Te replaces Fe, not Ti. Fi replaces Ti.

Similarly Pod'Lair research shows that physiological cues are generally related to location of powers fulfilling the same function, not of the same "type". So, Nai (Ni) cunning eyes and drift when disengaging to the left replace Vai (Si) concerned eyes and check when disengaging to the left. Xai drift when eyes disengage to the right is replaced with Zai check.
Cool articulation of Zyy is replaced with warm articulation of Xyy, etc.


----------



## LostFavor (Aug 18, 2011)

Octavarium said:


> If each of the eight functions is a distinct process that we can use, it's silly to say that each type can use only four of them. There's absolutely no reason for such a restriction. What would prevent someone who generally uses the Ti process from also using the Fi process? Even if they can't be used simultaneously (and I've heard no convincing reason to think that simultaneous use of Fi and Ti is uniquely problematic, as opposed to simultaneous use of, say, Ti and Ne) that doesn't mean they can't be used by the same person at different times. Are functions even tools or processes that we "use" anyway? Are Fi and Fe really distinct from each other, or are they the same function but in different attitudes, so that there are only four functions anyway? Whatever the functions are, there's no justification for saying that an Fi type can't also use/have Fe; nobody is 100% of anything.


It's a way of looking at the world and how the brain functions. That's the reason. 

We aren't at a point of cognitive science that we can actually _prove_ any such restriction. The reasons are purely pragmatic and philosophic. What reason is there to believe that we have unfettered access to all eight functions? The whole point is to narrow things down to such a fine view that we can see our similarities and differences more clearly.

To say, for example, that a person can use both Fe and Fi effectively misses the point of the model, which applies a distinct level of contrast. Fe and Fi, in the most common function model used, are diametrically opposed. To use one is to ignore (if not actively suppress) the other, and vice-versa. To regularly switch between the two would mean having no distinct personality, related to that particular function. 

The same can be said for the rest of the function pairings (Te/Ti, Se/Si, Ne/Ni). And even pairings such as Te/Fe, Ti/Fi, Se/Ne, and Si/Ni.

I think where many get confused is the shallower descriptions of the functions. If, for example, you see Fe as a function that has to do with agreeing with people in social situations and Fi as disagreeing with people in social situations, it would certainly seem rather silly to say that a person can only do one or the other. 

It is clear to me that the functions at their most useful are not shallow at all - rather, they go as deep as possible to get at the core of behavior. I think it is also important to note that there are things we control on some level and things that just _happen_. I don't actively ask for my brain to take in bits of information and put them together subconsciously. I don't ask to look at the future and see a tunnel-vision-like insight into what it might be. These are things that happen to me and I can then decide what I want to do with what is given to me.

It is also clear to me that other people have different things that just _happen_ to them. And they have different response mechanisms in place to handle the things that just happen. We could call a function pairing Fe and Fi, or we could call it locomotive and steamship. It matters little. What matters is the understanding we can glean from comparing the two and the results that tend to stem from them. 

To watch two people come from completely different walks of life, of different ages, and yet see an underlying similarity, hints at something deeper than environment alone. Whether this is cognitive functions or magic fairy dust, it appears to be something moderately static and unchanging throughout a person's life. I've yet to meet a person who appears to have changed throughout their life on that fundamental level (beyond becoming better at things they were always driven by). It is the difference between observing a person blink and asking why they blink. What compels them to do it. The magic fairy dust is the why. 

Just as a car can be driven fast or slow, safely or recklessly, regardless of the mechanisms under its hood, so too can a person. That's the idea of it. What's under the hood defines what can be done with the car - its limitations, its strengths, and its tendencies. There are things that all cars can do and things that some cars cannot do, while others can.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> They are different things. Te tries to represent Zyy which is a dynamics mover, while Ti tries to represent Zai which is a compass.


so...pod'lair is back, I see


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Felipe said:


> so...pod'lair is back, I see


Did they use to be away? Looking at their website on internet archive, they seem to be online at least since 2013.

Also:
Join Date: Feb 2016

Are you one of participants of the ancient drama  ?


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> Are you one of participants of the ancient drama  ?


I started looking into it. I like the videos Adymus did trying to dismantle other typology systems such as MBTI. I like his sarcasm. But ever since one girl of the group commited suicide, I figure pod lair was one of those crazy cults. Indeed, their leader 'Coach' has many traces of a sociopath cult leader.


----------



## Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar (Apr 9, 2015)

Felipe said:


> I started looking into it. I like the videos Adymus did trying to dismantle other typology systems such as MBTI. I like his sarcasm. But ever since one girl of the group commited suicide, I figure pod lair was one of those crazy cults.


Heard of it.

Crazy cults usually commit suicide together basing on some kind of a belief. Pod'Lair doesn't have beliefs that advocate suicide.

Basing on the info from the Intertype's gloating video, I have found her obituary and a profile on some who is site.
Hmm...
33, finished only high school.

Interesting, one of her sisters is a musician.

The suicide happened a few months after the whole Dismantling Pod'Lair drama. Looks like she has quit Pod'Lair somewhere between that drama and establishment of the new Pod'Lair site in March, 2013 as she wasn't on staff listing by that time. Too bad her "herography" didn't get archived :/ .
I suspect that what happened is that she realised there are no reasonable chances that Pod'Lair will succeed in any significant scale. She was a part of the team for at least 3 years.

That's important because a part of the Pod'Lair plan is making money on knowledge and skills. On readings, organizing events, etc. No popularity = no money. If she counted on making a career out of it, then realisation that they are going to end up as an obscure group of hobbyists would be life-shattering. Especially with USA's twisted higher education system... NO FUTURE.
Could be a suicide for financial reasons or due to some sort of an identity crisis.

Kinda fucked up that they have erased any info about her contributions and haven't posted any obituary, though D: .



Felipe said:


> Indeed, their leader 'Coach' has many traces of a sociopath cult leader.


Well, he's a Nai'xyy. I guess such impression comes with territory:tongue:.


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

Arzazar Szubrasznikarazar said:


> Could be a suicide for financial reasons or due to some sort of an identity crisis.


Actually, according to intertype, the ritualistic nature of the group and the super hipster/exoteric language they use may create an envirionment susceptible to these things (if you speak one language and the whole world speak another, your alienation from the rest of the world becomes too great). On top of that the pod lair team constantly stalked her on facebook cause they wanted her to come back. She probably got paranoid.


----------



## JacksonHeights (Nov 6, 2015)

I think each type uses all eight functions, except that the top four are "preferred". For example for me, my top four functions when I take tests are just about always Ne-Fi-Fe-Ni, I even got ENFJ as a result on the test a couple of times because of my strong Fe-Ni, even though Im clearly not a Judger. After all, I think the four letters are supposed to be more of a "gauge" than a "yes or no" button, which means that Judgers still use Perceiving functions, while Perceivers use Judging functions, the letter just shows preference


----------

