cognitive functions aren't temperaments, although they may correlate to them; come on now, this is basic stuff. extroversion is dominance of the object in relation to judgement/perception. generally this creates a tendency to live "in the world" because its through interacting with objects one derives "accomplishment." but you can go about it in different ways. DCNH probably does the best with this because you might say temperament is more likely a feature of type accent, not base type, although people, in lieu of having a contrasting accent, exhibit their base functions, so since most people don't have particularly strong accents, or have accents in line with their ego, you could say temperament follows ego. the main thing with DCNH is its changeable, which I like because I do think temperament is changeable and one reason where enneagram kind of falls down
you can have for example a introverted sociotype nevertheless manifest a "flexible-maneuvering" temperament, that correlates most strongly with base extroverted perceiving types. its more like we draw associations between temperaments and cognitive function on the basis of correlation but from a causal perspective they are not linked in the sense that humans can change their accent, their behavior, and their temperament thus however unlikely it is not the case that temperament dictates behavior going forward, it only describes past behavior and creates a strong inference that behavior will continue into the future. in fact personality is capable of transformation, which is why to say certain things are impossible is fundamentally a deterministic bridge to far. in general people are ordinary and it may be a safe bet to identify causation and correlation along the same lines, but there is in fact a deep cynicism inherent to that, that actually operates counter to why Jung developed personality theory to begin with. its sort of like saying he came up with this theory to grid out modes of being with the intent to improve them and transcend them, and then people came in after the fact and defined them into a prison from which escape was even in principle off limits, which is bad and kind of a betrayal of the spirit of things
really its all just a question of the time component, anyone can act like a type 7 for short periods, what type 7 tends to mean as a base type is that someone "lives" there, essentially reverting back to it as the default state, etc. seems to me a creative ILI could easily be a 7 but what it would look like is different than what a IEE 7 would look like. people make the mistake of identifying IEE 7 with the essence of 7 and thus making ILI 7 a contradiction, but it begs the question that 7 is IEE behavior and not something else, i.e.: the search for variety as distraction from pain, fear of which is the defining ethical motivation of the psyche. seems to me many ILIs are 7s in that sense. this is why shallow behavioral interpretations of sociotype and enneagram are so pernicious because they start to judge people and make assumptions about them and carry those forward in a way neither system was meant to support
