Are functions really related to introversion / extroversion?

[mikemex]

To me it seems that functions are neutral and introversion / extroversion is caused by something else...

Would like to hear other opinions, though.

[FDG]

You mean that a person gets, say and in disorder, and only thereafter something causes the prevalance of one over the other?

[mikemex]

I mean, just think about it.

It makes sense that perceiving functions are either introverted or extroverted, because such factor determines where information comes from, but it doesn't make sense that judging functions have a direction, because that would imply that they are perceiving too. Socionics says that functions work in pairs, one function providing information and the other processing it.

So how could an ENFj be extroverted if his perceiving function is introverted?

[machintruc]

I mean, just think about it.

It makes sense that perceiving functions are either introverted or extroverted, because such factor determines where information comes from, but it doesn't make sense that judging functions have a direction, because that would imply that they are perceiving too. Socionics says that functions work in pairs, one function providing information and the other processing it.

So how could an ENFj be extroverted if his perceiving function is introverted?

Basically because a EIE extrapolates from , as Rick said. An EIE seems even more "extroverted" than an IEE.

Rick also said that "perception elements" means "states of mind and body", and "judgement elements" means "actions and emotions".

[Jarno]

but it doesn't make sense that judging functions have a direction, because that would imply that they are perceiving too.

Both Perceiving and Judging are functions that supply the counscious with some information:

Perceiving by adding an object in the counscious.
Judging by adding an object in the counscious AND ALSO adding your own standard for that object.


i'll make it clearer with an example:

a group of people are talking with eachother

a perceiver hears a funny joke, he starts laughing
a judger (ethics) hears a funny joke, at the same time he knows this joke can insult the others, he doesn't start laughing.

[Joy]

Just keep in mind that all socionics "introversion" and "extroversion" means is that your first function is either introverted or extroverted. It has NOTHING to do with social introversion or extroversion.

[Exodus]

I think the difference between an introverted and extroverted function is that introverted functions are more idealistic, personal, and focused. Also, introverted functions (or people) like trimming away excess information. Take Si vs. Se. Se is busy, wanting new stimulation, expansion, whereas Si is responsible for maintaining equilibrium, stability.

"Socionics says that functions work in pairs, one function providing information and the other processing it. "

Honestly, I still don't understand how this interpretation applies to reality. Anyone want to explain it?

[anndelise]

I think the difference between an introverted and extroverted function is that introverted functions are more idealistic, personal, and focused. Also, introverted functions (or people) like trimming away excess information. Take Si vs. Se. Se is busy, wanting new stimulation, expansion, whereas Si is responsible for maintaining equilibrium, stability.

"Socionics says that functions work in pairs, one function providing information and the other processing it. "

Honestly, I still don't understand how this interpretation applies to reality. Anyone want to explain it?

dunno if this will help but....
my daughter and i both are perceiving subtypes, we both receive tons of information just different types of info (hers is Se mine is Ne).

unfortunately, we both have difficulty sorting through (aka processing) that information which leads to issues in other areas of life. We also both have difficulties "judging" people. (judging a person requires processing information about that person and arriving to a conclusion).

there are, however, some EFps (EFp being something my daughter share in common...no, i'm not taking into consideration reinin etc at the moment, I'm going for quick expression of an idea) as i was saying...some EFps who seem to find it easier to judge a person (aka processing information about the person and arriving to a conclusion about the person)

btw, for those who don't know, "judging a person" is being used here as an example of an EP moving easier into a judging function, "judging a person" is inconsequential to the example

[Exodus]

I was referring to statements like this:

"a EIE extrapolates Introverted Intution from Extraverted Feeling"

What does that mean?

[Ms. Kensington]

I also wonder about "something else" mikemex, its what i meant by an earlier thread on MBTI.

[anndelise]

I was referring to statements like this:

"a EIE extrapolates Introverted Intution from Extraverted Feeling"

What does that mean?

ah, sorry

again, fwiw, it's seemed to me that one possibility is that the accepting function provides the info (accepts the info), and the creative function processes it (which again provides info which again needs to be processed and so on)

however, i've seen similar as the paragraph above this one, only with perceiving in place of accepting and judging in place of creative. (being an accepting perceiving with creative judging helps confuse them even more)

in your example of EIE, I would read it as EIE processes Fe information by Ni-ing it
however, that doesn't take into consideration that Fe is sometimes labeled as extraverted feeling.
at that point it goes back to a round of expressing = Xe, not-expressing = Xi and other various arguments that have been made. If using the expressing vs not expressing, I would take it to mean something like an EIE accepts the *cough* emotions expressed but does not express the processing of it. Instead of hearing/seeing the EIE express the processing, we instead get to hear/see the results of the processing as the cycle continues.

accepts an emotion expressed by an other -> internally processes it -> expresses a result of the processing
-> this result and/or other expressed emotions become accepted and processed again -> expresses the result of the new processing
and so on and so on

Thus giving off the impression that the EIE is quite judgemental of others (we only hear/see the results)
and that this judgement is based on some expressed aspect of the other


and if you meant something completely else, feel free to ignore me!!

[Exodus]

I'm sure numerous insights are hidden in your posts, anndelise. Now if only I could understand them...

[anndelise]

I'm sure numerous insights are hidden in your posts, anndelise. Now if only I could understand them...

sometimes i recommend sanity over trying to understand what i may or may not be saying

i think one of the problems may be (relating to this thread) is that

*I'm expressing my perceptions
(which also happen to be my accepting functions) (Ne= extroverted intuition)

*I have difficulty processing my perceptions
(Xi-ing my Xe) (I maneuver around my perceptions based on feelings that were invoked during the accepting/perceiving process)
also note: my expressing my perceptions is kind of like a signal for someone else to help me with the processing part...which Te and Si often help with by focusing me on the parts that are really there and not the "what ifs" or "maybes"

*Thus I have difficulty expressing processed conclusions
(cuz there usually aren't any conclusions)

and believe it or not....this actually does fit in with your questions and your EIE example
but i can't flippin seem ...to .....explicitely..... state ....it!!!! aaaarrrrggghhhh

[Exodus]

I've heard accepting/producing explained in generalities before, but I need examples in Expatian format, like,

INTjs use Ti data for Ne purposes: <explanation>
....

Accepting/producing also seems much like rational/irrational, since irrational is more information-based, whereas rational is more decision-based. I'm not sure, this might be an MBTI concept.

[anndelise]

I've heard accepting/producing explained in generalities before, but I need examples in Expatian format, like,

INTjs use Ti data for Ne purposes: <explanation>
....

Accepting/producing also seems much like rational/irrational. Irrational is more information-based, whereas rational is more decision-based. I'm not sure, this might be an MBTI concept.

accepting is the first function, producing is the second function, and then each function afterwards follows accepting/producing/accepting/producing

so in the case of INTjs, accepts Ti produces Ne

rationals accept judging functions (this might give a perception of rationals being decision-based)
irrationals accept perceiving functions (this might give a perception of irrationals being information-based)

in the case of INTj, if we say Xe = expressed Xi = not expressed,
then an INTj would be someone whom we would not hear so much his judgements and his conclusions but more his perceptions AS he's processing the information.
An IN(T)j would be quieter (less movement into the expressed function) and/or seemingly more stringent/firm in accepted Ti (less movement into processing that Ti information)
An I(N)Tj would talk more, expressing his perceptions of that Ti info AS he's processing that information and/or seemingly less stringent/firm in accepted Ti (easier movement into processing that Ti info)

with the first, every once in a while we'd hear him processing information outside of himself
the problem would be, as he's attempting to process that info, we don't really know what info he's basing it on or starting out with

with the second, we semi-regularly hear him rambling on, musing to himself about something, his words aren't really made for others to hear nor understand
however, again, his musings and talking to himself are really him processing some kind of information which we aren't usually made aware of.

I'm learning, very slowly, that in IM or phone to just allow an I(N)Tj to talk without interuption, that he is doing something similar to what I do. The difference is that his ramblings are processing some info he's got hidden away in his head, and my ramblings are expressing things I notice but have difficulty processing. I can't help him much because I don't know what basis he's working from. (and funnily enough, he gets irriated that I assume he's asking for my help with something )

and with that last part in mind, i'm reminded that i'm not likely doing any good here

[Ms. Kensington]

I've heard accepting/producing explained in generalities before, but I need examples in Expatian format, like,

INTjs use Ti data for Ne purposes: <explanation>
....

Accepting/producing also seems much like rational/irrational. Irrational is more information-based, whereas rational is more decision-based. I'm not sure, this might be an MBTI concept.

accepting is the first function, producing is the second function, and then each function afterwards follows accepting/producing/accepting/producing

so in the case of INTjs, accepts Ti produces Ne

rationals accept judging functions (this might give a perception of rationals being decision-based)
irrationals accept perceiving functions (this might give a perception of irrationals being information-based)

in the case of INTj, if we say Xe = expressed Xi = not expressed,
then an INTj would be someone whom we would not hear so much his judgements and his conclusions but more his perceptions AS he's processing the information.
An IN(T)j would be quieter (less movement into the expressed function) and/or seemingly more stringent/firm in accepted Ti (less movement into processing that Ti information)
An I(N)Tj would talk more, expressing his perceptions of that Ti info AS he's processing that information and/or seemingly less stringent/firm in accepted Ti (easier movement into processing that Ti info)

with the first, every once in a while we'd hear him processing information outside of himself
the problem would be, as he's attempting to process that info, we don't really know what info he's basing it on or starting out with

with the second, we semi-regularly hear him rambling on, musing to himself about something, his words aren't really made for others to hear nor understand
however, again, his musings and talking to himself are really him processing some kind of information which we aren't usually made aware of.

I'm learning, very slowly, that in IM or phone to just allow an I(N)Tj to talk without interuption, that he is doing something similar to what I do. The difference is that his ramblings are processing some info he's got hidden away in his head, and my ramblings are expressing things I notice but have difficulty processing. I can't help him much because I don't know what basis he's working from. (and funnily enough, he gets irriated that I assume he's asking for my help with something )

and with that last part in mind, i'm reminded that i'm not likely doing any good here

this sounds good right now.

[mikemex]

Well, let's put it in fewer words: you're saying that perception functions can process and judging functions can perceive, it's just a matter of being accepting or producing.

But now I'm wondering, what's the difference between judging and a perception function then?

[aestrivex]

Well, let's put it in fewer words: you're saying that perception functions can process and judging functions can perceive, it's just a matter of being accepting or producing.

But now I'm wondering, what's the difference between judging and a perception function then?

there is not necessarily any structural or systematic difference between the different kinds of functions, be they perceptive, judging, introverted, extroverted, etc. those are simply nametags that allow these functions to be categorized to the appropriate individuals who demonstrate such behavior, and from this the functions can be said to take on the qualities of the persons who use them.

it is important to note that there is nothing magic about the structural framework of model A; it merely appears to work reasonably well and thus gives rise to these rather vague and necessarily indefinite concepts.

[anndelise]

Well, let's put it in fewer words: you're saying that perception functions can process and judging functions can perceive, it's just a matter of being accepting or producing.

But now I'm wondering, what's the difference between judging and a perception function then?

http://the16types.info/forums/viewto...=195421#195421
relevant summary to your question:

The perceiving functions are something along the lines of "continualness" and "integrity"
(not integrity as in "that person has a lot of integrity"...but as in "wholeness")

The judging functions are something along the lines of "discretion" and "divisibility"
(not discretion as in "please be discrete about this and don't tell anyone"....but as in "discrete parts")

Statics have "continual/integrated" objects combined with "discrete/divided" fields (fields aka interrelationships/interdependencies).
Dynamcis have "continual/integrated" fields combined with "discrete/divided" objects.

{edited to delete nonapplicable sentence....i was confusing this thread with another thread}


oh, and along the lines of what niffweed said

[mikemex]

there is not necessarily any structural or systematic difference between the different kinds of functions, be they perceptive, judging, introverted, extroverted, etc. those are simply nametags that allow these functions to be categorized to the appropriate individuals who demonstrate such behavior, and from this the functions can be said to take on the qualities of the persons who use them.

Then you implicitly agree with my idea that introversion / extroversion may have nothing to do with functions.

[science as magic]

in all fairness the "subtype" framework could encompass your suggestions.

personally i phrase it more like the processes by which cognition occur are not circumscribed by functional boundaries. there is no reason to bring functionality into it at all you see.

[mikemex]

I'm open to your ideas. If functions have really no differences between them, so you can judge and perceive using anyone, and cognitive process doesn't have much to do with functions, then how types exist at all?

[discourse]

Actually introversion and extroversion is an interesting topic. People mentioned here the transtendent function. I red Jung today and as I understand, the transtendent function is becoming an ''ambravert'' in terms of analytical psychology. The two urges wanting to go into opposite direction, to outside (extroverted) and to inside (introverted), making life into mess, will wanish from an irrational impulsse coming from unconciousness, what will make those two sides uniting. And living after, he describes as living by the rules of Dao. Individ has become whole and the opposites are turned into one. I don't understand it much, but this is what Jung sayed.

it sounds beautiful, doesn't it! :wink:

[science as magic]

I'm open to your ideas. If functions have really no differences between them, so you can judge and perceive using anyone, and cognitive process doesn't have much to do with functions, then how types exist at all?

i think there are relations between various "formations." for example alcoholics tend to get into car accidents more than teetotalers. the thing is there are so many different "formations." there are millions and millions of forms of stimuli, behaviors, and environments and so many of them exist at "the boundaries" of what we consider to be functional behavior. my basic argument is that we have a better ways of discussing different types of interaction such as cybernetics and complexity theory. the problem with these methods is that they require more technical knowledge, equipment, and time than most people have to spare. this is why we are forced by our lack of means to be "practical" and speak of these things in terms that are easily transmittable to others. we should NEVER make the mistake of treating these simplifications as significant in their own right however nor should we view them as absolute or permanent. they are just an approximation of something that is better discussed in the most universal language we have thus far, namely, math

[machintruc]

Actually introversion and extroversion is an interesting topic. People mentioned here the transtendent function. I red Jung today and as I understand, the transtendent function is becoming an ''ambravert'' in terms of analytical psychology. The two urges wanting to go into opposite direction, to outside (extroverted) and to inside (introverted)

somewhere I read that extro=absolute, and intro=relative, like in mathematics

[krieger]

somewhere I read that extro=absolute, and intro=relative, like in mathematics

That sounds interesting; where did you read that exactly?

[mikemex]

Although many people view being introverted or extraverted as a question with only two possible answers, levels of extraversion in fact fall on a normally distributed bell curve, with most people falling in between the two extremes. Ambiversion is a term used to describe people who fall more or less directly in the middle and exhibit tendencies of both groups.[1] An ambivert is normally comfortable with groups and enjoys social interaction, but also relishes time alone and away from the crowd.