That site is horrendous, ugh. People doing consensus typing based on stereotypes and inertia, and then literally getting mad at people who do a typing that goes against the consensus.
This video is important for every MBTI enthusiasts to clear the misconception about actions and functions. Thinking about the past is strictly associated with Si within the community. Could that be another example? Thanks for the video Chris
I've made the the mistake before of estimating someone's type based off of their lifestyle and their attitudes/preferences, and it just wasn't panning out; it really is the lens through which they see things
If actions were cognitive functions you'd totally be an ESFP, no one else can drink that much tequila. Also, it really sounds like there's someone you want to punch in the face 🤔🤔
This was a very much needed video, thank you !! It is not rare to witness the confusion in numerous videos out there. Even I at some point used to believe that typology worked this way. Being exposed to various videos listing up characteristics that a person of a certain type should have in order to really be this type eventually makes you unconsciously believe that this is the way things work. Eventually I stepped out of it and logically assessed what makes sense and what doesn't in this way of thinking according to what I know of human psyche and a bit of intuition. I reached the same conclusions you exposed in this video and it does feel somehow liberating to hear this from somebody else. The analogy of the lenses/glasses is something I also liked to use to make my different points clearer as it can be hard to properly explain something so "abstract". In the end, we are only aware of our own perceptions, we can only experience things through our own filters, which makes understanding others more strenuous. Judging others based on their behavior is the easiest way to "classify" them because this is what we see of them. So we mistakenly assume that if, I, as a certain type, do these types of things, then someone of this same type will do the same. This is a short-cut many learned to use in the MBTI community, and even though I do not deny that there is a relation between behavior and cognitive functions, it is not all there is to it. The reality is always messier anyways. Thank you once again Chris, have a nice day.
I can name a couple of CZcamsrs in the typology community that do this. 😂MBTI is not behavioral analysis. The way a person sips their coffee is not indicative of their type.
@@t5396 I didn’t say never. But I do think that typing people based on actions completely negates other realistic factors, such as, upbringing, culture, gender, personal values, etc. What’s more important is to observe what functions are being used consciously and unconsciously by the subject to gather information and make decisions. What “lens” are they putting on to do this? Not just looking at the actions, as there may be other reasons for why they do what they do.
So true. It seems the majority of the people interested in type communities have enneagram six motivations (core or at least a fix), which means they're constantly monitoring behaviors. It's almost as if the 6 strategy makes them unable to focus on motivation cause but rather what behavior is happening and what *could* happen. I think helping the 6s understand that when it comes to typing people accurately, you have to dig past the actions and understand why.
I've been thinking about this lately, thanks for putting it into words! Based on what you've said here, it even sounds weird to "work on" functions; what we really need is to become more self aware and more aware of others. Also in attempt to understand the functions I've tried to "simulate" the headspace, as best I can anyway hah. Anyone else do this?
I don't usually comment, but I wish I could give this video a gazillion likes; Clear-cut and concise clarity on what the functions are, and how best to go about life with the functions you have; Great video! :)
I couldn’t have said it better myself. I’ve seriously been trying to figure out how to best word this in my videos but I couldn’t do that in a very concise manner. Thanks for this, very helpful!
The title made me like the video instantly, because it felt so revelatory as it made the way I saw this misconception clearer in my head. So thank you!
Yes, a person can't hope to be like me if they don't know for certain why I do what I do. They can satirize my behavior, sure, but they would easily do a lot of damage if they don't see the method to the "madness" - especially if I am someone who handles many delicate matters that they don't see or have enough experience with to be an effective judge. People are better off being their sincerest selves. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but the short-term effects can be very destructive and lasting, kind of making the flattery not worth it! 😑✌️ Thanks for the video! ✔️
Human body is an instrument to perceive through 5 senses and intuition from instinct to intellect. I feel that we start with deep understanding of what the mind is from biological system to soul level. We may have been programmed the moment since we were born but life is getting unfold what we want, what we need and what we desire and everything happens for reason for soul growth? All problems come from when we completely want to control every aspects of life and we’re stuck to our own prison. In the end we just follow programmed in the brain in term of biological system and can not see beyond. Each individual has own lens to see the world and the lens not only reflect our cognitive fx but also our inner deep who we are as cosmic being. Nature teach us about the mystery in the universe if we open our mind and heart.
@@Ella-qg4bq 🌞we could all use a little release from ourselves from time to time 🥵, though I'm glad that I've learned what to watch for over the years as well and sometimes trust myself more than I used to ... but openness is natural, and growth - though at times it may be a balance - always has something new to offer and always holds a promise 💟
Amazing video! Entirely true! What I would appreciate more than anything else would be better descriptors of each function as a distinct lens. If a few follow-up videos can be made about the ‘focus of attention’ for each of the 8, I think that this community would gain a ton of insight!
YES! For years I thought everyone understood it this way but time and time again I have been wrong. I am so tired of the "Oh, you're Se PoLR so you won't have a physical reaction" !?!?! I have a body? I can react in the moment and also that's not the full scope of Se. Even as a Ti dom I don't like people who say Ti=logic. No. It's just an affinity for logical structures. Doesn't mean it's fully aligned.
So if I’m interpreting this correctly, when typing people it’s more important to consider their driver and the the reason WHY they behave a certain way than the behaviour itself. Essentially should be typing on motivation over behaviour? (LOLs.. I’m INFJ ... I needed to boil down the vid into a single truth).
not really motivation, that’s more of an enneagram thing, I think it’s more so you’re cognition. Like how do you think? What type of processor is the back of your head processing information?
I kinda agree about the "don't try to be someone you're not" thing in principle, but the issue here is, lots of people are gonna mistype at one point or another. So for example, someone who thinks they are ENTJ who is trying to "develop" Fe could come to find that they actually were INFJ and the whole reason they were trying to "develop" their Fe is because they were coming into their own as an INFJ after having leaned on behaviors more associated with ENTJ earlier in life due to trauma or some kind of coping mechanism as a result of the environments they grew up in, in general. Where I tend to agree most with it, is I think there's a certain psychological danger in trying to change your cognitive lens too drastically too quickly, in particular if you are not telling anyone about it and are essentially just conducting experiments on your own psyche. Sometimes you do need to reevaluate significantly and I think we are all always reevaluating to some degree throughout our lives, but attempting a drastic and consistent change to a completely different lens may cause some problems. I don't think it's a guarantee it's going to cause issues for the person, but that people should exercise caution in that area and where possible, communicate with someone trusted about it, so you aren't just fumbling around in the depths of your own psyche, playing mind games with yourself. Changing surface behaviors, on the other hand, I think is much safer to do, as you'll just tend to be utilizing your default lenses to do it, like you describe. And you can accomplish a lot in terms of being more the person you want to be just by utilizing your default lenses in service of the cause, provided you can accurately pinpoint (or have it pinpointed for you) what those lenses are. If you don't have an accurate picture there, then you may run into the "neurodivergent trying to utilize advice for neurotypicals" kind of problem, where you keep attempting techniques that don't fit your actual lenses well.
Great video and I’m glad you brought this topic up! I'm an INTJ and I have used Te to appeal to Fe when trying to persuade others. The way I live my life and form my political views are based on maximizing the long term well-being of humanity and the planet, although there are also civil liberties that I don’t think should be crossed, even if it seems to empirically be better for the greater good. I take an empirical approach to this and am persuaded by statistics and peer-reviewed research. At times to appeal to Fe I virtue signal.That isn’t me using Fe, that is me understanding that different people will be persuaded on issues through different ways of reasoning. I asked my ESTP brother what his default mode of operation was once. He is very much “in the moment”. Even when he is laying on the couch, he is very aware of the surrounding environment and he said he doesn’t have a lot of mental chatter. While what is in my head often isn’t words (although I do that when internally debating an issue), I am almost always playing something out in my head. I usually only experience what he described during moments where I have to be fully engaged in the moment, like while skiing on a black diamond. I think the show “The Queens Gambit” depicted Ni + Te well. Some of the top chess players would talk about how they would play the game out (or at least a few moves) in their head before they chose which one to make. They knew what the logical moves of their opponent was and would be able to see if a move would work. Other times, the main character just knew what the best move was the instant they looked at the board.
Yes this is so important and often overlooked in the type community. It’s not looking at the outputs to determine type, it’s looking at the process to get there. INTPs and INTJs might reach the same conclusion and show up the same but the route to get there is so so different
I watched this video, so I worked on my Se while eating cookies which I always eat (Si) together with my friend (Fe) while i was reasoning about this particular subject (Ti) :p :p Thse functions are getting soooo stronggggg... obviously a joke..
excellent video, also when you brought up how extjs use Te to act like Fe, or bring about Fe outcomes, is something I notice I do in trying to improve my inferior Fe, ill logic put the emotions of others without actually looking at how they feel
Asura, I love your content. What are the chances of you discussing the pros and cons of being an MBTI practitioner? I love typology and I want to help people, but it's hard to find information on being or becoming an MBTI practitioner. Your help is appreciated.
By the way, I clicked the link to your Patreon in the description and it didn't work. However, I was able to find it by going to that website and doing a search for it.
So, you are saying that I(as a likely INTP) really never use Te Ni Se or Fi... I might use a combination of Ti Ne and Fe to achieve similar results to Te, Ti Ne And Si to achieve similar results to Ni and Se(in differing bias), and Ti and Fe to achieve similar results to Fi?
How somebody acts is merely an indication of their type, but you have to put the pieces together because what you're actually trying to figure out is how they think.
Apparently according to C.F Joseph the theory is that we can become another personality type and the theory of 4 sides of your mind when your stressed out you would go to a shadow type eg. ENTP can go to an INTJ . I don't agree with this theory you can't change your personality type your are wired that way but you can improve on your functions what are your thoughts about this ?
I disagree…everybody processes information through all 8 cognitive functions to a certain degree…I am an outlier on this point…Perhaps Jung thought otherwise, but then I disagree with Jung. I think functions work like being left handed or right handed…certainly we favor some functions over others, but even if I am left handed it doesn’t mean I can’t use my right arm…cognitive functions work together in tandem not separately…that’s another common misconception about cognitive functions that they work separately and cannot process information in different ways at the same time…what I disagree with what you said is that “you can fake” a cognitive function. If you are left handed your right arm functions like an arm and though not as efficiently as your left you are stronger and more capable when you use both arms than if you only, use one……favoring my left hand doesn’t mean I don’t at all have use of my right…I think free will and choice has nothing to do with how cognitive functions work it’s just common sense; either we have the capacity to process information to a degree with all 8 cognitive functions or MBTI doesn’t make any sense at all - a function is a function…also I am not sure Jung equated cognitive functions with personality typing…what I understand is he thought of cognitive functions as an expression of the collective unconscious and he didn’t have any cogent theory about personal typology or individualization of types…most of his ideas about the collective unconscious he had borrowed from other traditions (and I realize this is a controversial point) that he knew little to nothing about…meaning he couldn’t have possibly, delineated or individuated personalities as for example, Biblical typology does…
Strongly disagree with your idea of just sticking to your top 4 functions. I think yes it's a good place to start, but after you've done good work integrating your 3rd and 4th functions there's a lot more growth to be had by integrating your shadow functions, and it seems there's natural systems for doing so within the mind. As an ENTP id be lost in my life and my career if I hadn't have integrated my Ni+Te. And ive seen great personal growth and a big improvement on my ability to both philosophise and feel at peace within myself through integrating my Fi as much as i have. I can even remember specific moments when i 'broke through' and 'unlocked' my Fi while meditating The brain wants to explore the other 4 functions, telling people to stop at just 4 is, i think, telling people to set lower standards for themselves and not aspire to be the best they can be. Why just be an ENTP or an INTJ or whatever when you can master and then transcend your type? We have the knowledge and insight and technology now that allows us to do this reliably and with consistent results. It seems foolish to me to aim so low as to only dream of mastering your default childhood type Enjoyed the video anyway tho, and i definitely agree with the lenses rather than actions perspective. you're always thought provoking :)
I see every one as a set of program. Nothing more. Myself included. In other words, the so called humanity is just code. Perceiving functions: data input. Judging functions: data output
Interesting point of view, but maybe a little simplistic? I'd say it's the other way around. A program is an imitation of natural and human occurrences, patterns and laws. You can associate them all to the concept of program though, and in a practical way it makes sense: they are similar and work in a similar way.
@@DarkBlazeLeggendaxu if we can’t choose or change our type and functions/ how we take in and process info. How we make decisions. Then what makes us any different from a program? I can basically predict anyone’s behavior. And that’s why I see us as programs. We are too predictable to have free will.
@@universologist1941 "If we can’t choose or change our type and functions/ how we take in and process info. How we make decisions. Then what makes us any different from a program?" Well if I input something in the input of a program he is going to give me a programmed response or output. If I tell a person to do something and expect a "programmed/expected output" I might not get one because the person didn't feel like giving me the response/output I wanted. "I can basically predict anyone’s behavior." For example, "basically" in this sentence talks uncertainty. If you were more confident in your predictive abilities you would have written "I can predict anyone's behavior". And hence it's a bit bold to say "We are too predictable to have free will". Sure some people are simple, others are complex. I would rather say that we do have free will, but we alone have taken it away from us. If you put a person in the same situation 10 times he/she would 7-8 times out of 10 do the same thing.
@@universologist1941 well this is also ONE lense you are viewing through - the typical modern neuroscientific view. We are nothing more than a code/program and can essentially be reduced to the brain. This is an absolutization. Rather, we are partly determined by biology/neurology, partly by cultural construction. But we are also free, intentional individuals living in a breathing, ensouled cosmos and neither we or it can be reduced to matter. Live is a highly ambiguous process and can never be reduced to one concept or theory.
@@symphony-of-destruction I can predict someone’s behavior to 100% accuracy if I know them well enough. But I don’t know many ppl that well. That’s why I used basically.
I just love the way you explain things! This is brilliant! You have changed the way I view cognitive functions, the lense example really helps. And I love the visuals you use now, they really help solidify your points!
also I'm not sure how aware you are of the personality database site, but this is a HUGE problem there
That site is horrendous, ugh. People doing consensus typing based on stereotypes and inertia, and then literally getting mad at people who do a typing that goes against the consensus.
That's a very important thing to be said, thank you.
This video is important for every MBTI enthusiasts to clear the misconception about actions and functions.
Thinking about the past is strictly associated with Si within the community. Could that be another example?
Thanks for the video Chris
Another super important thing in typology, but most people only see the actions and behaviors. More videos like this please!
I've made the the mistake before of estimating someone's type based off of their lifestyle and their attitudes/preferences, and it just wasn't panning out; it really is the lens through which they see things
If actions were cognitive functions you'd totally be an ESFP, no one else can drink that much tequila. Also, it really sounds like there's someone you want to punch in the face 🤔🤔
This is one of the best explanations of cognitive functions that I've seen. Thank you.
I like the metaphor about the lenses - I apply the same one when I explain this :)
Very well said, Chris!
This was a very much needed video, thank you !! It is not rare to witness the confusion in numerous videos out there. Even I at some point used to believe that typology worked this way. Being exposed to various videos listing up characteristics that a person of a certain type should have in order to really be this type eventually makes you unconsciously believe that this is the way things work. Eventually I stepped out of it and logically assessed what makes sense and what doesn't in this way of thinking according to what I know of human psyche and a bit of intuition. I reached the same conclusions you exposed in this video and it does feel somehow liberating to hear this from somebody else.
The analogy of the lenses/glasses is something I also liked to use to make my different points clearer as it can be hard to properly explain something so "abstract". In the end, we are only aware of our own perceptions, we can only experience things through our own filters, which makes understanding others more strenuous. Judging others based on their behavior is the easiest way to "classify" them because this is what we see of them. So we mistakenly assume that if, I, as a certain type, do these types of things, then someone of this same type will do the same. This is a short-cut many learned to use in the MBTI community, and even though I do not deny that there is a relation between behavior and cognitive functions, it is not all there is to it. The reality is always messier anyways. Thank you once again Chris, have a nice day.
I can name a couple of CZcamsrs in the typology community that do this. 😂MBTI is not behavioral analysis. The way a person sips their coffee is not indicative of their type.
Name a few?
Are you saying that behaviors never correspond to cognitive functions? Are you saying that types cannot have behavioral tendencies?
@@t5396 I didn’t say never. But I do think that typing people based on actions completely negates other realistic factors, such as, upbringing, culture, gender, personal values, etc. What’s more important is to observe what functions are being used consciously and unconsciously by the subject to gather information and make decisions. What “lens” are they putting on to do this? Not just looking at the actions, as there may be other reasons for why they do what they do.
So true. It seems the majority of the people interested in type communities have enneagram six motivations (core or at least a fix), which means they're constantly monitoring behaviors. It's almost as if the 6 strategy makes them unable to focus on motivation cause but rather what behavior is happening and what *could* happen. I think helping the 6s understand that when it comes to typing people accurately, you have to dig past the actions and understand why.
I've been thinking about this lately, thanks for putting it into words! Based on what you've said here, it even sounds weird to "work on" functions; what we really need is to become more self aware and more aware of others.
Also in attempt to understand the functions I've tried to "simulate" the headspace, as best I can anyway hah. Anyone else do this?
I don't usually comment, but I wish I could give this video a gazillion likes; Clear-cut and concise clarity on what the functions are, and how best to go about life with the functions you have; Great video! :)
I couldn’t have said it better myself. I’ve seriously been trying to figure out how to best word this in my videos but I couldn’t do that in a very concise manner. Thanks for this, very helpful!
This is what I have been trying to tell people all the time, thank you for putting it in a easy and digestible way
Thank you. Glad someone is dispelling this perception.
You should make more videos about cognitive functions and video games/fictional characters
The title made me like the video instantly, because it felt so revelatory as it made the way I saw this misconception clearer in my head. So thank you!
Yes, a person can't hope to be like me if they don't know for certain why I do what I do. They can satirize my behavior, sure, but they would easily do a lot of damage if they don't see the method to the "madness" - especially if I am someone who handles many delicate matters that they don't see or have enough experience with to be an effective judge. People are better off being their sincerest selves. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but the short-term effects can be very destructive and lasting, kind of making the flattery not worth it! 😑✌️
Thanks for the video! ✔️
Human body is an instrument to perceive through 5 senses and intuition from instinct to intellect. I feel that we start with deep understanding of what the mind is from biological system to soul level.
We may have been programmed the moment since we were born but life is getting unfold what we want, what we need and what we desire and everything happens for reason for soul growth? All problems come from when we completely want to control every aspects of life and we’re stuck to our own prison. In the end we just follow programmed in the brain in term of biological system and can not see beyond. Each individual has own lens to see the world and the lens not only reflect our cognitive fx but also our inner deep who we are as cosmic being.
Nature teach us about the mystery in the universe if we open our mind and heart.
@@Ella-qg4bq 🌞we could all use a little release from ourselves from time to time 🥵, though I'm glad that I've learned what to watch for over the years as well and sometimes trust myself more than I used to ... but openness is natural, and growth - though at times it may be a balance - always has something new to offer and always holds a promise 💟
Amazing video! Entirely true! What I would appreciate more than anything else would be better descriptors of each function as a distinct lens. If a few follow-up videos can be made about the ‘focus of attention’ for each of the 8, I think that this community would gain a ton of insight!
YES! For years I thought everyone understood it this way but time and time again I have been wrong. I am so tired of the "Oh, you're Se PoLR so you won't have a physical reaction" !?!?! I have a body? I can react in the moment and also that's not the full scope of Se.
Even as a Ti dom I don't like people who say Ti=logic. No. It's just an affinity for logical structures. Doesn't mean it's fully aligned.
So if I’m interpreting this correctly, when typing people it’s more important to consider their driver and the the reason WHY they behave a certain way than the behaviour itself. Essentially should be typing on motivation over behaviour?
(LOLs.. I’m INFJ ... I needed to boil down the vid into a single truth).
not really motivation, that’s more of an enneagram thing, I think it’s more so you’re cognition. Like how do you think? What type of processor is the back of your head processing information?
I kinda agree about the "don't try to be someone you're not" thing in principle, but the issue here is, lots of people are gonna mistype at one point or another. So for example, someone who thinks they are ENTJ who is trying to "develop" Fe could come to find that they actually were INFJ and the whole reason they were trying to "develop" their Fe is because they were coming into their own as an INFJ after having leaned on behaviors more associated with ENTJ earlier in life due to trauma or some kind of coping mechanism as a result of the environments they grew up in, in general.
Where I tend to agree most with it, is I think there's a certain psychological danger in trying to change your cognitive lens too drastically too quickly, in particular if you are not telling anyone about it and are essentially just conducting experiments on your own psyche. Sometimes you do need to reevaluate significantly and I think we are all always reevaluating to some degree throughout our lives, but attempting a drastic and consistent change to a completely different lens may cause some problems. I don't think it's a guarantee it's going to cause issues for the person, but that people should exercise caution in that area and where possible, communicate with someone trusted about it, so you aren't just fumbling around in the depths of your own psyche, playing mind games with yourself.
Changing surface behaviors, on the other hand, I think is much safer to do, as you'll just tend to be utilizing your default lenses to do it, like you describe. And you can accomplish a lot in terms of being more the person you want to be just by utilizing your default lenses in service of the cause, provided you can accurately pinpoint (or have it pinpointed for you) what those lenses are. If you don't have an accurate picture there, then you may run into the "neurodivergent trying to utilize advice for neurotypicals" kind of problem, where you keep attempting techniques that don't fit your actual lenses well.
Hey, Chris! I loved this video and referenced you in one of my own vlogs. Thanks for this video!
Great video and I’m glad you brought this topic up!
I'm an INTJ and I have used Te to appeal to Fe when trying to persuade others. The way I live my life and form my political views are based on maximizing the long term well-being of humanity and the planet, although there are also civil liberties that I don’t think should be crossed, even if it seems to empirically be better for the greater good. I take an empirical approach to this and am persuaded by statistics and peer-reviewed research. At times to appeal to Fe I virtue signal.That isn’t me using Fe, that is me understanding that different people will be persuaded on issues through different ways of reasoning.
I asked my ESTP brother what his default mode of operation was once. He is very much “in the moment”. Even when he is laying on the couch, he is very aware of the surrounding environment and he said he doesn’t have a lot of mental chatter. While what is in my head often isn’t words (although I do that when internally debating an issue), I am almost always playing something out in my head. I usually only experience what he described during moments where I have to be fully engaged in the moment, like while skiing on a black diamond. I think the show “The Queens Gambit” depicted Ni + Te well. Some of the top chess players would talk about how they would play the game out (or at least a few moves) in their head before they chose which one to make. They knew what the logical moves of their opponent was and would be able to see if a move would work. Other times, the main character just knew what the best move was the instant they looked at the board.
Yes this is so important and often overlooked in the type community. It’s not looking at the outputs to determine type, it’s looking at the process to get there. INTPs and INTJs might reach the same conclusion and show up the same but the route to get there is so so different
Love the glasses analogy!
This video is Gold !!
Thank you, you explained this really well. 👌
I watched this video, so I worked on my Se while eating cookies which I always eat (Si) together with my friend (Fe) while i was reasoning about this particular subject (Ti) :p :p
Thse functions are getting soooo stronggggg...
obviously a joke..
Very much agree!
Tysm for this 💕🙏🏼 this is definitely a misconception that I had and I see it everywhere.
Let me commit a heresy here. Completely Jungian, but still heretic in these times: Functions are Archetypes.
***INFP gets punched in the face***
1. Introverted feeling: "what happened!?"
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7. Extroverted Sensing: "probably nothing"
8.
excellent video, also when you brought up how extjs use Te to act like Fe, or bring about Fe outcomes, is something I notice I do in trying to improve my inferior Fe, ill logic put the emotions of others without actually looking at how they feel
This was very helpful. I understand this even better than before so thank you ☺️
Great explanation :)
This is a great explanation
Asura, I love your content. What are the chances of you discussing the pros and cons of being an MBTI practitioner? I love typology and I want to help people, but it's hard to find information on being or becoming an MBTI practitioner. Your help is appreciated.
Perfectly balanced
By the way, I clicked the link to your Patreon in the description and it didn't work. However, I was able to find it by going to that website and doing a search for it.
So, you are saying that I(as a likely INTP) really never use Te Ni Se or Fi... I might use a combination of Ti Ne and Fe to achieve similar results to Te,
Ti Ne And Si to achieve similar results to Ni and Se(in differing bias), and Ti and Fe to achieve similar results to Fi?
How somebody acts is merely an indication of their type, but you have to put the pieces together because what you're actually trying to figure out is how they think.
Finally someone explains it!
Apparently according to C.F Joseph the theory is that we can become another personality type and the theory of 4 sides of your mind when your stressed out you would go to a shadow type eg. ENTP can go to an INTJ . I don't agree with this theory you can't change your personality type your are wired that way but you can improve on your functions what are your thoughts about this ?
Very good video with very good points that should be obvious and common sense for everyone. Unfortunately thats not the case.
this is so interesting thanks
I disagree…everybody processes information through all 8 cognitive functions to a certain degree…I am an outlier on this point…Perhaps Jung thought otherwise, but then I disagree with Jung. I think functions work like being left handed or right handed…certainly we favor some functions over others, but even if I am left handed it doesn’t mean I can’t use my right arm…cognitive functions work together in tandem not separately…that’s another common misconception about cognitive functions that they work separately and cannot process information in different ways at the same time…what I disagree with what you said is that “you can fake” a cognitive function. If you are left handed your right arm functions like an arm and though not as efficiently as your left you are stronger and more capable when you use both arms than if you only, use one……favoring my left hand doesn’t mean I don’t at all have use of my right…I think free will and choice has nothing to do with how cognitive functions work it’s just common sense; either we have the capacity to process information to a degree with all 8 cognitive functions or MBTI doesn’t make any sense at all - a function is a function…also I am not sure Jung equated cognitive functions with personality typing…what I understand is he thought of cognitive functions as an expression of the collective unconscious and he didn’t have any cogent theory about personal typology or individualization of types…most of his ideas about the collective unconscious he had borrowed from other traditions (and I realize this is a controversial point) that he knew little to nothing about…meaning he couldn’t have possibly, delineated or individuated personalities as for example, Biblical typology does…
YES!
I wanna know who disliked this video.
Probably the people who believe psychological type is all about stereotypical behaviours, lol.
Strongly disagree with your idea of just sticking to your top 4 functions. I think yes it's a good place to start, but after you've done good work integrating your 3rd and 4th functions there's a lot more growth to be had by integrating your shadow functions, and it seems there's natural systems for doing so within the mind. As an ENTP id be lost in my life and my career if I hadn't have integrated my Ni+Te. And ive seen great personal growth and a big improvement on my ability to both philosophise and feel at peace within myself through integrating my Fi as much as i have.
I can even remember specific moments when i 'broke through' and 'unlocked' my Fi while meditating
The brain wants to explore the other 4 functions, telling people to stop at just 4 is, i think, telling people to set lower standards for themselves and not aspire to be the best they can be.
Why just be an ENTP or an INTJ or whatever when you can master and then transcend your type? We have the knowledge and insight and technology now that allows us to do this reliably and with consistent results. It seems foolish to me to aim so low as to only dream of mastering your default childhood type
Enjoyed the video anyway tho, and i definitely agree with the lenses rather than actions perspective. you're always thought provoking :)
I see every one as a set of program. Nothing more. Myself included.
In other words, the so called humanity is just code.
Perceiving functions: data input.
Judging functions: data output
Interesting point of view, but maybe a little simplistic? I'd say it's the other way around. A program is an imitation of natural and human occurrences, patterns and laws. You can associate them all to the concept of program though, and in a practical way it makes sense: they are similar and work in a similar way.
@@DarkBlazeLeggendaxu if we can’t choose or change our type and functions/ how we take in and process info. How we make decisions. Then what makes us any different from a program?
I can basically predict anyone’s behavior.
And that’s why I see us as programs. We are too predictable to have free will.
@@universologist1941 "If we can’t choose or change our type and functions/ how we take in and process info. How we make decisions. Then what makes us any different from a program?"
Well if I input something in the input of a program he is going to give me a programmed response or output. If I tell a person to do something and expect a "programmed/expected output" I might not get one because the person didn't feel like giving me the response/output I wanted.
"I can basically predict anyone’s behavior."
For example, "basically" in this sentence talks uncertainty. If you were more confident in your predictive abilities you would have written "I can predict anyone's behavior". And hence it's a bit bold to say "We are too predictable to have free will". Sure some people are simple, others are complex. I would rather say that we do have free will, but we alone have taken it away from us. If you put a person in the same situation 10 times he/she would 7-8 times out of 10 do the same thing.
@@universologist1941 well this is also ONE lense you are viewing through - the typical modern neuroscientific view. We are nothing more than a code/program and can essentially be reduced to the brain.
This is an absolutization.
Rather, we are partly determined by biology/neurology, partly by cultural construction.
But we are also free, intentional individuals living in a breathing, ensouled cosmos and neither we or it can be reduced to matter.
Live is a highly ambiguous process and can never be reduced to one concept or theory.
@@symphony-of-destruction I can predict someone’s behavior to 100% accuracy if I know them well enough. But I don’t know many ppl that well. That’s why I used basically.
I just love the way you explain things! This is brilliant! You have changed the way I view cognitive functions, the lense example really helps. And I love the visuals you use now, they really help solidify your points!