I intend to suggest that our perception of what functions "mean" or "do" is directly contingent upon our political views; so to say, on our psychic subdomain of choice. I say this because although I have put forward functional definitions that make sense to me, others have disagreed with them. To try to bridge these disagreements I am presenting alternative interpretations of the functions here.


SP = Static Potential/Conservative Viewpoint
SK = Static Kinetic/Republican-Traditionalist Viewpoint
DK = Dynamic Kinetic/Social Progressive-Nationalistic Viewpoint
DP = Dynamic Potential/Liberal-Progressive Viewpoint

Introverted Intuition (Sequential Intuition)

SP - depth of perception
SK - cycles
DK - evolutionary progression
DP - breadth of considerations


Extroverted Intuition (Instance Intuition)

SP - few instances, high detail
SK - limited opportunity ranges
DK - adaptation opportunity
DP - many instances, low detail


Extroverted Sensation (Force Sensation)

SP - magnitude of forces
SK - static/restraining forces
DK - changing/adapting forces
DP - quantity of forces


Introverted Sensation (Interrelational Sensation)

SP - somatic interrelations
SK - continuous interrelations
DK - spontaneous interrelations
DP - group interrelations


Extroverted Thinking (Relational Communication and Exchange)

SP - physical exchanges
SK - static exchanges
DK - changing exchanges
DP - information exchanges


Introverted Thinking (Structure)

SP - structural depth
SK - persistent structure
DK - changing structure
DP - structural breadth


Introverted Feeling (Emotion)

SP - depth of feeling
SK - enduring feeling
DK - changing feeling
DP - plural feeling


Extroverted Feeling (Experience)

SP - depth experience
SE - experience of stability
DK - experience of change
DP - plural experience
I am not suggesting that one attempts to perceive the world through the lense of one viewpoint alone; (at least not normally) but rather that our perspectives on the functions are constantly shifting and changing along several polarities. (sometimes we choose the static kinetic view, others the static potential view, etc.) In particular, preferring a view that emphasizes one extreme will shut off our willingness to perceive its opposite. I suspect this tendency, which I believe manifests in all of us, is the root of our many arguments over what a function "is", regardless of issues of type.