# Ni-dominant and Ti-auxiliary?



## Quelzalcoatl (Dec 6, 2010)

A question. Every time I do a cognitive functions test, it tells me that my order of cognitive functions is;

Ni 13.09
Ti 11.84
Ne 10.88
Te 7.16
Fi 2.85
Fe 1.98
Si 1.54
Se -2.2

The latter two tend to vary per test, but overall, this is pretty much my cognitive function result. Personally, I've always been a bit in doubt about my INTJ-ness, which I imagine could possibly also be INTP, however, I am far too organized, mentally and information-wise, and I don't start things unless I'm quite certain I have the time and or capability to also finish them.

How is it, then, that my Ni and Ti are so high, and my Te is just a bit... lingering.. Let's call it that. Does anyone have a proper explanation for me here? Merci.


----------



## phantom_cat (Jan 1, 2011)

the cognitive processes won't be in order. looks like Ti is overdeveloped. so let's say you use Ni+overdeveloped Ti, then you may have a loop there, since both are introverted functions. since the processes work in pairs, the next after Ni would be either Te or Fe, Te in your case, so you still are INTJ. however, let's say you use Ni+Ti instead, read here: http://personalitycafe.com/articles/25205-dominant-tertiary-loops-common-personality-disorders.html

at least that's my understanding of it. even though the linked post is for dom-tet loops, I'm guessing it's the same if one was to use a process that's not in their 4 processes.

edit: maybe not... after thinking further, maybe it's like this example...

vision (Ni), logic/understand competely (Ti), empirical logic/taking action (Te), so as an INTJ, naturally you would use Ni+Te, if you use Ni+Ti instead, you probably won't be efficient. I guess it could be considered a loop still since you're using 2 introverted functions together.


----------



## timeless (Mar 20, 2010)

There are two Ni dominant types: INTJ, INFJ. INTJ is Ni-Te, INFJ is Ni-Fe. So because Te > Fe, then that sounds like INTJ.


----------



## Jennywocky (Aug 7, 2009)

I've taken function tests before, and typically my top four include Ti, Ne, Ni, and Fe. 
I think at least once I got a test result where Ni was in first place. 
I've got a side to my personality that mirrors INFJ as well, and I get along well with INFJs, but I'm not a J.

I think my point is we can guess at various permutations (of which INTJ is a decent guess); but I think actual observation is more conducive to drawing conclusions when the test scores are clumped and varying like that. I also think there's natural variability, and that the textbook cases are just ideals, whereas the average person likely won't fit perfectly into expectations.


----------



## Quelzalcoatl (Dec 6, 2010)

Hmm, that's actually really rather interesting. Considering I'm running by a psychiatrist due to a high chance at a schizophrenic diagnosis, so I suppose the mental illness could contribute to my odd cognitive functions? If you put it like you did after your edit, however, I do find that I use Te a lot more than I thought. I do use Ti to understand a subject, but only to a certain extent, and Ni will fill in the blanks assisted by Te's logic. I'm an incredibly decisive person as well, so much so that it surprised the psychological diagnostic that supervised me through my psychological evaluation.



> They live in their own abstract worlds, constantly second-guessing themselves as Ti poses a framework for a problem and Ni shoots it down as too definitionally precise.


That generally doesn't happen. I do most of my research with Ti, and when I've gathered enough information - or information from different sources - I use Te to synthesize a concise and relevant framework out of all that information. Everything that's not clear is run through Ni until I get x's and y's (like in math), that I can eventually fill out as I continue. That's how I build systems and information resources, etc.

Actually, your input and my own rant has given me a lot more insight into this. I think I understand how it works now. Thank you. 




Jennywocky said:


> I think my point is we can guess at various permutations (of which INTJ is a decent guess); but I think actual observation is more conducive to drawing conclusions when the test scores are clumped and varying like that. I also think there's natural variability, and that the textbook cases are just ideals, whereas the average person likely won't fit perfectly into expectations.


It's like squares, circles and triangles. Real people aren't a perfect shape, and thus won't perfectly fit into the slot in which an ideal square, circle or triangle would slide right in. I suppose you're right. n_n


----------



## Promethea (Aug 24, 2009)

I always score Ni Ti Ne Te also. Weird. I'm an intp though. I just don't think the jcf is that solid a theory.


----------



## Branden (Dec 24, 2009)

Promethea said:


> I always score Ni Ti Ne Te also. Weird. I'm an intp though. I just don't think the jcf is that solid a theory.


It's not JCF that isn't a solid theory, its that the cognitive function test is a bunch of bull, at best. The true problem is that people don't truly understand the cognitive functions and therefore often sight them incorrectly. The functions are not as boxed as people would like to make them seem. For example, extroverted feeling is often only associated with peoples feelings, but that is not the case. It is a rational extroverted decision making process. When working in tandem with Ti, it can often appear to be Te. Other functional pairs can do this as well. 

People always assume that the functions work independently of each other when that is never the case. The functions are always working together, because in order to judge you must perceive, and vice versa. 

If you truly identify with Ni and Ti, then you are a strongly developed INFJ. Please don't buy into the gimmick that "feelers" are not intelligent or intellectual. Many INFJ's like myself have confused ourselves as INTJ's because of our well-developed tertiary Ti.


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

You cannot use both Ti and Te.
You cannot use both Ni and Ne.
If your eyes are on the front of your head, you can never see what's behind you.

Functions are not actions but attitudes.
When functions combine, they can make it look like you are using other functions when you are not.
If you turn around, it can seem as if you can see behind you, but it's not the same thing - you still can't see behind you. Even if there's a video camera screen in front of you, showing what's behind you, you still cannot see behind you, because it is merely an image in front of you. Although on the test, you'd probably write, 'yes, I can see behind me.' 

You also cannot do research with Ti. If you're gathering information, then you are using a perceiving function.


----------



## phantom_cat (Jan 1, 2011)

you need to use all functions to balance out your personality. it's just that some functions are more developed than others.


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

Using both Te and Ti is hardly balancing since in one case you are making your logic match facts, the other making your logic match abstract ideas. As you can't do both at the same time, vacillating between the two will produce inconsistencies in your thought process.


----------



## phantom_cat (Jan 1, 2011)

you can. look at the questions on the assessments, you can have 1 for one process, and the rest for the other one. you can use both, but one is more developed. I actually relate to each process, but more so for some.


----------



## noaydi (Feb 18, 2011)

listen to one who is right  :



> You cannot use both Ti and Te.
> You cannot use both Ni and Ne.
> If your eyes are on the front of your head, you can never see what's behind you.


Ni dom will have hard time to use Ne
Ne >> potential , possibility, test possibility , hypothesis, many idea at once, attracted to new
Ni >> flow of event , time, massive use of symbolism, attracted to interpret , to archetype

problem is that description and quizz often suck, function work by pair, mix of function can somewhat look like a function, agencement of function isnt as simple as we think (INTP and INFP attracted often to archetypal too due to their strong demonstrative Ni for example).

if youre an INFJ u should absolutely dont rely on Te and hardly on Ne. INFJ are Fi, Ni, Fe mainly, and somewhat Ti and Se. tertiary is generally an hard function to determine if u use it or not (sporadical use + weak). Se weak too, but more often used so more easy to see if u use it or not.

If you want to determine accurately your type, read description of function, try to compare to what u know IRL about other or u, re read from multiple source , and u will probably see the light...


----------



## noaydi (Feb 18, 2011)

Whats strange onto your result is to identify with Ne. 
for INTJ, something like Ni >= Ti >= Te > Fi >= Se > Si > Ne > Fe is a normal result in term of what you identify.
(what you identify != strong function - Ne, Fe and Si remain strong function in INTJ, but undervalued, and Fi / Se are weak but valued)
After this all is about on how you relate to reality, on wich function. And here function description are usefull : 
Ti >> "I have the truth, a system of truth, I often debate this and appear being the truth itself"
Ne >> "i go from a project to another, following intellectual interest, never stop trying idea"
Fi >> "I have emotionnal sensitivity, Im hard on myself, I try to find the correct path, I often judge things good or bad, speak about way of life and appear to be the conscience itself when speaking Fi mode. Ive depht of feeling more than wide"
Si >> "Im very touchy, I often think about response of my body/gut sensation response to exterior"
Fe >> "I get along with everyone, im a social master" I dont really understand this function, I just understand globally how it work comparing to Fi.
Ni >> "Im a dreamer, always using symbolism when speaking, and time is contractible and stretch. I sometime wait for a powerfull savior. Im not sure to being connected on a archetypal level with other (NiFe mainly for the last one)"
Se >> "?" lol idk as an INFP idk what is Se, strongly hate this function. I can only understand it beeing contrary of Si.
Te >> "Im really mature comparing to other, do things efficiently, can plan many things at once, responsible and knowledgeable"


Its really simplificated, and second function play a major role too, wich I dont speak about here.


----------



## phantom_cat (Jan 1, 2011)

Do we really only use four cognitive processes? - INTJ Forum


----------



## noaydi (Feb 18, 2011)

the response is no. 
U tend to use often Ti , Te , Ni and Se 
A intj saying having a good use of Ne :
- isnt a real intj
or
- fail to understand Ne


----------



## alionsroar (Jun 5, 2010)

I think it may depend on which model you are using, since some models say you use all 8 functions. While some say only four are conscious. Tests are not always a good measure of whether you actually do use a function or not.


----------



## noaydi (Feb 18, 2011)

Personnaly I use mainly model A from socionic (but dont agree with all socionic). I think its actually the best model to represent how function are used. Some dichotomies are interressent too. Even if they fail to describe some profil, and fail to integrate the fact that life experience play a big role too into a personnality.

For me : 

MBTI have the most interressant way to describe profile (global description), but sometime fail on understanding some function and how they work together. Typically the basic example of epic fail is beetween ISFJ and ISFP, and somewhat into INFP and INFJ. INFJ description seem more an INFP turn bad, and INFP is an okay FiNeSiTe sometime look very little like NiFeTiSe on some description or FiNeSiTe-Ne subtype. I notice that INTP(TiNeSiFe)/INTJ (NiTeFiSe) is more okay.

Enneagram is excellent for understanding basic motivation of ppl, but their description can suck cause too focused on one specific result of basic motivation.

Socionic (Model A) is the perfection itself on the theory side, but wikisocion type description is somewhat of a bunch of shit, too focused on specific, particular and in the same time too archetypal.

And I rely heavily on all what ive read into psychology, or some other test like big five.


----------

