The Actual Nature of the Functions

[jason_m]

Ti: this is a deep, logical thinker. We are talking about deep insights into any subject, whether it be philosophy, pure mathematics, etc.. The real nature of this function is not structure; the person is structured only if there is some kind of deep thought in the subject. Other functions can simulate Ti, including Ni and Ne, but someone who is Ti is a pure logical thinker. (I value this function, but I might not have it as an ego function.)

Te: now we get into the realm of structure, precision, and organization. It is extraverted thinking that focuses on objective facts and figures. Many business minds have this or require this, as I see this in fields like banking, accounting, economics and finance ad nauseum. They can be in scientific fields. (I do not value this at all.)

Fi: if Ti is depth of thought, Fi is depth of feeling. Deep, inward feelings about God, religion, morals, ethics, etc. (I'm not sure that I have this. I like EIIs though. to the EIIs here.)

Fe: if Fi is deep, Fe is less so but more sociable. This is someone who is humorous, warm, sociable and likes to include people. (I don't often value this, but I especially like someone humorous.)

Se: these are pure sensates. Someone who seeks out the loudest, most vibrant sensations, whether it be roller coasters, sex, food or any other strong sensations. (I value this.)

Si: this is sensation that is more subjective. Someone who seeks out 'deeper' sensations, such as beauty or art, or someone whose sensations are tuned into the way the body feels, as these are sensations turned toward the self. (I value this.)

Ni: this is subjective intuition. Turned inward, this function has 'flashes of insight.' Understands the self. The insights can be turned toward something like abstract art that has a subjective, personal message. (I think I value this.)

Ne: turned outward, this is a creative, project-oriented person. Jumps from project to project and job to job, getting deeply into it and then just 'dropping it.' Tendency toward creative activities and jobs. Startlingly clever. (I value this.)

Ve: this is 'extraverted will.' This is someone strong, domineering and willful who imposes their will on others. Wants others to push themselves as hard as they push themselves. Tries to mold others to follow their goals/desires. Demanding. Is seen as aggressive because of their tendency to push others. (I do not value this.)

Vi: this is 'introverted will.' This is someone who can push themselves through difficult tasks. Think of a marathon runner who can push themselves toward the finish line through shear strength of will. This is will, but will aimed at the self. Can be aggressive, but not as much as Ve, as it is aimed at the self more than others. (I do not value this.)

[Tallmo]

They are psychic units or complexes that process information. That's why you can identify functions without necessarily knowing what they are or seeing the real information.

[jason_m]

And what do you think is wrong with socionics? E.g., "I value extraverted sensation. But, whoops, I don't value that. It's really extraverted will I value." There is a real confusion here. Also, two people who are "EII": one is Se-PoLR, the other is Ve-PoLR. The two people might not be on the same wavelength and then they don't get along because of it...

[Tallmo]

You are now playing a semantic game. I totally understand that you have problems with Socionics and I think you will always have.

[jason_m]

Another one: "I'm Ti-leading. Whoops. I mean Te-leading." You see?

[jason_m]

You are now playing a semantic game. I totally understand that you have problems with Socionics and I think you will always have.

Also, how are these just 'semantic?' Do you not see any real difference between some of these functions?

[The Banana King]

Ti: this is a deep, logical thinker. We are talking about deep insights into any subject, whether it be philosophy, pure mathematics, etc.. The real nature of this function is not structure; the person is structured only if there is some kind of deep thought in the subject. Other functions can simulate Ti, including Ni and Ne, but someone who is Ti is a pure logical thinker. (I value this function, but I might not have it as an ego function.)

Te: now we get into the realm of structure, precision, and organization. It is extraverted thinking that focuses on objective facts and figures. Many business minds have this or require this, as I see this in fields like banking, accounting, economics and finance ad nauseum. They can be in scientific fields. (I do not value this at all.)

Fi: if Ti is depth of thought, Fi is depth of feeling. Deep, inward feelings about God, religion, morals, ethics, etc. (I'm not sure that I have this. I like EIIs though. to the EIIs here.)

Fe: if Fi is deep, Fe is less so but more sociable. This is someone who is humorous, warm, sociable and likes to include people. (I don't often value this, but I especially like someone humorous.)

Se: these are pure sensates. Someone who seeks out the loudest, most vibrant sensations, whether it be roller coasters, sex, food or any other strong sensations. (I value this.)

Si: this is sensation that is more subjective. Someone who seeks out 'deeper' sensations, such as beauty or art, or someone whose sensations are tuned into the way the body feels, as these are sensations turned toward the self. (I value this.)

Ni: this is subjective intuition. Turned inward, this function has 'flashes of insight.' Understands the self. The insights can be turned toward something like abstract art that has a subjective, personal message. (I think I value this.)

Ne: turned outward, this is a creative, project-oriented person. Jumps from project to project and job to job, getting deeply into it and then just 'dropping it.' Tendency toward creative activities and jobs. Startlingly clever. (I value this.)

Ve: this is 'extraverted will.' This is someone strong, domineering and willful who imposes their will on others. Wants others to push themselves as hard as they push themselves. Tries to mold others to follow their goals/desires. Demanding. Is seen as aggressive because of their tendency to push others. (I do not value this.)

Vi: this is 'introverted will.' This is someone who can push themselves through difficult tasks. Think of a marathon runner who can push themselves toward the finish line through shear strength of will. This is will, but will aimed at the self. Can be aggressive, but not as much as Ve, as it is aimed at the self more than others. (I do not value this.)

Can you explain more about Vi? Did you come up with it or do other socionists talk about it? I really identify with it, always thought it was Se-role or something lol.

[Fluffy Princess Unicorn]

Hi, I am Fi. i DoN't HaVe DeEp ThOuGhTs BeCuZ i OnLy HaZ fEeLzInGz. I have big dumb. I r feelz mad x5...deepity feelz mine r mor deepity than ur feelz. Fi iz deEpitY feeLz.

[VewyScawwyNawcissist]

there is no fullness without emptiness, a concept implies its opposite. theres no sensing without intuition. theres a difference in the cognitive patterns, but does anyone actionally know what it is, and if they do, how would they exactly pin point it? like with other conceptual frameworks in science, it would have to be based on something that's been established before, that would be used as a reference, to relate previous conceptual frameworks to new ones.
i can think my feelings and feel my thoughts. i dont think any feeler just "feels" things without thinking them, it seems impossible. Jung said images are as much thoughts, as much feelings, as much as they are also perceptions.

[Adam Strange]

Hi, I am Fi. i DoN't HaVe DeEp ThOuGhTs BeCuZ i OnLy HaZ fEeLzInGz. I have big dumb. I r feelz mad x5...deepity feelz mine r mor deepity than ur feelz. Fi iz deEpitY feeLz.

You know, if you want to effectively imitate dumb, you're going to have to try harder.

[Fluffy Princess Unicorn]

You know, if you want to effectively imitate dumb, you're going to have to try harder.

I so want to crack a joke, but it's probably mean (not toward you), and I'm going to behave.

[Adam Strange]

I so want to crack a joke, but it's probably mean (not toward you), and I'm going to behave.

OK, I'm pretty hard to offend, but use your own judgement.

It's too bad kidding doesn't translate perfectly through text.

[ouronis]

I liked because I notice the "only structured in some things" thing in Ti users too.

I think if you're going to get at the actual nature of the functions, you should focus on more than surface-level effects.

[Hot Scalding Gayser]

lol there's no such thing as Ve or Vi but that's cute. Ve is just a typical 4D Te ego person that's more of an obvious asshole. xD Vi is just anybody who decides to go after what they really want and accomplish a goal. I don't even see how those can be functions. and I agree they just sound way too stereotypical. What about Fi being about attraction and repulsion, like and dislike etc. - I agree it's more commonly associated with white trash religious types ((they don't seem any deeper than me, and I called them white trash- so how am I warmer?)) but it can also be about loving baseball and hating opera.

[xerx]

I see them like bodily organs.

[Tallmo]

Also, how are these just 'semantic?' Do you not see any real difference between some of these functions?

A function is a living psychic phenomenon. You can try to describe it but you can never capture it fully with words. Real life experience of the function comes first. So I don't know what you mean when you write "I value this" for many of the functions that are incompatible, like Se and Si. The way I understand it you are using the descriptions to decide weather you value it or not. But that's not how it works. But maybe I didn't understand what you were doing?

[jason_m]

I liked because I notice the "only structured in some things" thing in Ti users too.

I think if you're going to get at the actual nature of the functions, you should focus on more than surface-level effects.

Wow. Another deepity I just don't have enough intelligence to comprehend. I saw your pic before. Is it you who posts all the cartoons on facebook? I'll try to ponder what I post here more carefully.

[jason_m]

Can you explain more about Vi? Did you come up with it or do other socionists talk about it? I really identify with it, always thought it was Se-role or something lol.

I came up with it myself. I had to really think about it, but it just made sense. It is just the concept of will or willfulness from psyche-yoga turned inward - pointed at the self. Therefore, such people can do things like push themselves to run marathons, work for hours, compete in sports and sporting events, weightlifting - really anything that requires the ability to will *yourself.*

[jason_m]

lol there's no such thing as Ve or Vi but that's cute. Ve is just a typical 4D Te ego person that's more of an obvious asshole. xD Vi is just anybody who decides to go after what they really want and accomplish a goal. I don't even see how those can be functions. and I agree they just sound way too stereotypical. What about Fi being about attraction and repulsion, like and dislike etc. - I agree it's more commonly associated with white trash religious types ((they don't seem any deeper than me, and I called them white trash- so how am I warmer?)) but it can also be about loving baseball and hating opera.

Or loving Fe and not liking Fi? Or liking Si over Se? Or liking any of the domains of the information elements? Or liking dual? That would all be Fi, right?

[WVBRY]

I think it's important to keep in mind none of socionics or Jungian typology is established science. It is all still in experimental stages.

I don't think it's crazy for people to speculate or have a different take on the Jungian functions since it's all experimental.

[ouronis]

Wow. Another deepity I just don't have enough intelligence to comprehend. I saw your pic before. Is it you who posts all the cartoons on facebook? I'll try to ponder what I post here more carefully.

Would you believe that it's actually intended as constructive criticism? Not everything is going to be flattering to your ears and not everything unflattering is hostile.

I'm not sure what you're talking about re facebook, I don't use facebook.

[jason_m]

Would you believe that it's actually intended as constructive criticism? Not everything is going to be flattering to your ears and not everything unflattering is hostile.

I'm not sure what you're talking about re facebook, I don't use facebook.

Sorry. I read some condescension in there that wasn't misplaced. Chalk it up to the Internet and my insecurities...