# Cognitive Functions and Ambiversion



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

Ambiversion may be difficult to reconcile with the cognitive functions. After all, cognitive function theory dictates that if your dominant function is an introverted function, then you are an introvert. Case closed. Further more, an ENFP, for instance, can't have both Ne and Fi as dominant functions. However, I think I may have found a way to reconcile this: It all has do with cognitive functions being on a continuum.

Let's take someone who is, say, ENTJ. Their functions are Te, Ni, Se, and Fi, in that order. The strength of each function may look something like this, on a scale of one to four:

Te: 4
Ni: 3
Se: 2
Fi: 1

Now let's take another ENTJ. This one believes that they are an ambivert. Their cognitive function strength could look like this:

Te: 3.51
Ni: 3.49
Se: 1.52
Fi: 1.48

This person's cognitive functions seem to be almost even, with the extroverted functions just barely beating out the introverted ones. Thus, he could effectively be an ambivert.

Thoughts?


----------



## counterintuitive (Apr 8, 2011)

I agree that technically there are no ambiverts, since no one has co-dominant cognitive functions. But for some people the auxiliary is almost as strong as the dominant, like you said. I agree.


----------



## Ray J (Mar 20, 2011)

Ambiversion within Cognitive functions may point to conflicts.

but 

Ambiversion in the context, whether a person may draw energy from the external and internal, with preferences being right on the line, is certainly plausible.



_guys the subject is the human brain ....... Nothing should set in stone_ I like to exist in a world where anything is possible


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

Here's where someone actually tried to develop a full model of "moderate preference" with the functions:
76 Personality types?
And another, showing why it was complicated::
Ambiverts!

I also explore these ideas here: Dynamic Type: Adding Moderate Scales to MBTI for 76 or 81 types
You end up with 76 types (really, 81, but XXXX and four others were deemed undeterminable).
"Ambiversion" would represent a moderate pole between I and E, of course.

I had been interested in this back then, since the temperament system I use has moderate poles. But soon afterwards, especially as I began understanding function theory better, I basically dropped the idea. Even in the temperament system, the moderate temperaments do fall slightly to one side or the other. "Phlegmatic Melancholy" will be slightly introverted, while "Phlegmatic Choleric" is slightly extroverted.

So ambiversion would just indicate an overall moderate preference towards E or I, or, more accurately, moderate behavior (stemming from a balanced need of stimulation from the environment). In MBTI, even a slight preference still pushes it into the hard pole of E or I, which then shapes the function orientation, of course.


----------



## Ray J (Mar 20, 2011)

hmmm that was interesting ..... but that page was full of J's :dry:





> Do you see how annoyingly complicated this makes things?



_well jeeze' true. :dry: I always knew the brain was meant to be a simple piece of machinery..._


----------



## Ray J (Mar 20, 2011)

I may be a noob around here. but it hasn't taken me long to realize a lot of J's and people for that matter, hold the MBTI as if they were holding the ten commandments....


jeeze..... wow how do you guys feel about horoscopes??


----------



## Ray J (Mar 20, 2011)

*smart girl'*


----------



## devoid (Jan 3, 2011)

I actually scored quite high on Ne, but the rest of my functions are a bit fuzzier. Specifically, the difference between Fe and Si development was very subtle, and my Ni and Te were both higher than my inferior function. This might make me seem ambiverted simply because my shadow functions are so prominent for now. As I continue to develop my personality and overcome my insecurities, I act less like a weirdly social INTP and more like an extrovert.


----------



## Naama (Dec 5, 2010)

there is no ambiversion in jungian types(or MBTI/whatevers that come from it), E or I comes from dominant function, whether its introverted or extraverted function. if a person cant decide about I or E because he is so close to both, it doesent make him ambivert, it just means that he doesent know his dominant function.

in other personality theories you can have equally strong I and E, but thats because they measure I and E differently from jungian theories.

and scoring something on a test doesent mean anything other than an indication(thats why MBTI test is myers briggs type indicator) towards finding your type. not to mention that some free internet tests are even more inaccurate than the newer authentic ones.


----------



## Naama (Dec 5, 2010)

Ray J said:


> *smart girl'*


not commenting on her being smart or not, but she doesent quite know whats she is talking about


----------



## Angelic Gardevoir (Oct 7, 2010)

Naama said:


> there is no ambiversion in jungian types(or MBTI/whatevers that come from it), E or I comes from dominant function, whether its introverted or extraverted function. if a person cant decide about I or E because he is so close to both, it doesent make him ambivert, it just means that he doesent know his dominant function.


What I meant was that if the auxiliary function is almost as strong as the dominant, it could make someone believe that they are ambiverted.


----------

