Why/How Understanding Cognitive Functions in MBTI (Myers-Briggs) Personality Theory Matters, Pt. 1 Correlations and distinctions between dominant and inferior functions in themselves. By Jacqueline Guerrero After studying personality typing validity for years, I have discovered that this form of Typology, the Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), has been officially linked to neuroscience. In light of that, I thought it would be important to tackle some misconception circulating through the internet/online communities, and provide more concise understandings regarding the relations of "cognitive functions" that the test and theory is centered around. I intend to write about how neuroscience has now been connected with MBTI typology, specifically in regards to cognitive functions and in a way that will explain the link between these theories and the discoveries recently being made/validated. First and foremost, I thought it would be a good idea to provide a general map to understanding (piece-by-piece) regarding information I have systematized over time. I have shifted the paradigm of the average Joe and Typology Experts/Profilers alike, I have a reformed and provided a more accurate form of testing/screening to propose that will increase the accuracy of results, and I believe this is a crucial point in time to start circulating truth as an iconoclast. I have found trends, through long-term study, made a new algorithm, and backed it with unbiased data. Many issues regarding the theory have not yet been formally addressed, and I will also critique the points of the theory where there is controversy, proposing resolutions. As this theory is now being used in ways such as being distributed to employers and students in college seeking careers, I believe it is imperative that certain issues be addressed. I will also post some results of some longitudinal studies and piecing together information I have collected for years. I'm read to bring my knowledge base together and produce something useful. I also have knowledge in regards to other personality theory, so I can draw comparisons to other articles and proposed theory. I, among others, have concluded that it is important these issues are formally addressed as groups of people are being formed globally around their 4 letter "type code" and bigotry is forming as a byproduct (among other issues). I can't help but get this vivid imagery of Carl Jung turning in his grave because of the current state of affairs and misinterpretation of his proposed usage(individuation). These quotes from Nikola Tesla are pertinent to the issue at hand: "Fights between individuals, as well as governments and nations, invariably will result from misunderstandings in the broadest interpretation of this term." -Nikola Tesla "Misunderstandings are always caused by the inability of appreciating one another's point of view. The best way to dispel ignorance of the doings of others is by a systematic spread of general knowledge. With this objective view, it is most important to aid exchange of thought and intercourse." -Nikola Tesla ~~~ Quick & Easy Explanation of Cog. Function Relations (between the four complementary pairs), and Import Things To Know : Quick summary of function meanings: INTROVERTED INTUITION (Ni) = convergent internally (bring together connections/systematizing) EXTROVERTED INTUITION (Ne) = divergent externally (externally producing potential options/brainstorming) INTROVERTED SENSING (Si) = reflecting internally on past sensory experiences EXTROVERTED SENSING (Se) = experiencing in the moment and taking in sensory experiences INTROVERTED THINKING (Ti) = tweaking a given model for internal consistency based upon informal rules of logic and checking for inconsistencies EXTROVERTED THINKING (Te) = externally rearranging or internally rearranging for external consistency (efficiency and clarity/concise) EXTROVERTED FEELING (Fe) = treating each situation proportionately in terms of what you think is appropriate (morally sound) and in consequence sacrificing non-contextual consistency INTROVERTED FEELING (Fi) = building a system of moral consistency(aiming for objectivity) that does not change, regardless of changes in situation Cognitive function pairs/interrelations regarding Dominant vs. Inferior functions: - These functions, Te/Fi, Ti/Fe, Ni/Se, and Ne/Si (and vice versa) pair up, because they depend on each other. If you have a preference for an individual function, you must necessarily have a preference for its complementary function for the following reasons. This partially helps explain why the type theory is based more about natural preference (comfortable inclinations) than ideal preferences. These descriptions take into account the specific relations respectively: Rational subdivisions: Te/Fi or Fi/Te Striving for external consistency, Te bases reasoning and its concept of the "proper" approach to logic on objective(external) standards. Consequently, in a Te system is so there no doubt about what the correct road to take in terms of asserting an idea, enforcing a rule, or correcting other people is (or otherwise it is extremely rare). Fi strives for internal consistency in terms of identifying an objective, unwavering ideal, which in turn feeds into how they respond behaviorally in the midst of change. The strength in both Te and Fi lie in their non-contextual consistency. Their combined approach is unwavering. Ti/Fe or Fe/Ti Striving for internal consistency, Ti bases reasoning on internal preference for organization at the extent of potentially of negating superimposed logical imperatives (Te), and Ti will notice inconsistencies in theoretical models. Fe reacts to inconsistency in environment by adaptation, not expecting the world to change, but through adapting (changing behavior and communication style), to more effectively convey what can be concluded. Fe gauges what the other person may consider "proper" (though unknowingly acting inconsistently when it comes to external behavior). Fe tries to do what is best for the collective vs. what is best for the individual (Ti concludes the conclusion is sound via deduction) through considering impersonal preferences, often at the expense of suppressing personal preferences (Fi). This can be likened to the analogies regarding teaching a man to fish vs. feeding him, and wearing slippers vs. carpeting the world. Irrational subdivisions: Ni/Se or Se/Ni Se absorbs sensory information constantly, taking in new information and Ni sifts through it. Ni, being a lifelong developmental system, looks for any novel information that causes egodystonic comprehension of what the ONE truth, the consistent pattern, is. It will question WHY something is different or similar when it seems out of character regarding the context, and based upon the system it has established, it will constantly guess and check, revising itself to promote more accurate interpretations of perception. This allows inductive reasoning with a fair amount of confidence as it is further refined. It views probability in terms statistic on a subconscious level, but because usually people don't engage in metacognition, there is lack of awareness to how their conclusions are reached. For this reason, you may hear a Ni dominant person say they have a "feeling" about something, but admit they can't explain why. Without Ni, Se wouldn't have any reason to carry about the actions it thrives on (thrill of acting in the moment), because there is no anticipation of the excitement living in the present of a given situation would bring, thus no motivation. Ni treats all information coming in as equally credible (in the respect that it has no value until the quality of the information is confirmed). If there is something that seems to differ from what had become the established norm, and threatens to topple the system that had been in place, Ni seeks out an explanation. Ni tries to prevent negative consequences through anticipation, as well. Ne/Si or Si/Ne Ne is very well adapted to produce/propose novel ideas, focusing on past experiences to brainstorm what could possibly work, what may be a good idea, what may be useful, using Si to remember past experiences to identify and trigger connections. Unlike Ni, which discerns which path to follow with statistics, Ne considers each connection with equal validity/potential and probability. If a proposed idea from Ne is shot down, there will likely be several more on queue to offer. Si uses Ne in a way that affirms its value, as Si focuses on past experiences. From the perspective of Si, if the present ideas in question/being proposed and internal collection of past experiences have no apparent relevance to each other (even if the extent of perceived relevance is could be questioned by others), Si would conclude the Ne idea could not be considered pertinent to the situation at hand. Ne draws from the Si storehouse of past experiences, while Si supplements Ne with specific, individual instances to draw patterns from as it compares the past experience to the current situation's demands. (...that's right, people. I actually compiled a document so I don't have to keep writing this same explanation over and over, like I had been doing for years. Looks like my Extroverted Thinking(Te) does have some fighting spirit left, after all. There is much more to be added, but that will be reserved for another article.) As a side note: For the purpose of clarity, everybody uses ALL of the functions. Despite this, we can only have 4 pairs of functional preferences. The above concepts only explain preferences specifically in regards to this subject matter, and is a large part of why, theoretically, you can't prefer inverse pairs of functions (i.e. Ne/Ni, Fe/Fi, Se/Si, Te/Ti) at the same time. I have not yet addressed other parts of the theory that can account for why an individual may naturally skilled in terms of both inverse functions, depending on what your general Dominant Function is, all of the aforementioned inverse pairs taken into account, be it Intuition, Thinking, Feeling, or Sensing. You may have noticed that the Judging/Perceiving (J/P) dichotomy aren't spoken of. There is a reason for this that will be addressed in another article.