Extraversion/introversion - Keirsey vs. Jung

[Petter]

I disagree. It *must* be both, at least to some minor degree, and especially in this case of them being from the same domain (sensing). You cannot technically have an IE as completely standalone as it is expressed with the cognition of a person, as all 8 IEs are necessary for IM/type and can and are being accessed, correct? You can have different ideas generally associated with and specific to each IE as you theoretically define them but when it comes to isolating which single IE is being used in practice from an activity being carried out it's negligible on whether that can be done; it must be more casual and blurry than that. In the bigger picture there may be one IE that's being used more compared to the other IEs (e.g. mostly Ne is being used with analogy or associated with making and understanding analogies, or mostly logical functions are used when doing mathematical calculations), but technically not only one in many cases with many activities, especially not when looking at the even bigger picture. Your brain is actively using many different parts of it, both introverted and extroverted cognition, all the time. It is not simple.
I do however, agree with you that there is merit in trying to define the IEs more in the sense of trying define which IEs are involved in which specific aspects of carrying out certain activities, and how. E.g. even saying that Ne is "analogy" is only true in a broad sense too, since without some degree of Ni usage the analogy would probably be off-base.

Yes, most activities involve more than one IM element/function. But I still think it is possible to define them. So some aspects of 'analogy' are about Ne, and other aspects are not.

I don't see how "That's a huge mountain" can be related to Se, if we are using my (or SSS's) definitions of Se and Si.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...r-IM-elements)

[niffer]

I don't see how "That's a huge mountain" can be related to Se, if we are using my (or SSS's) definitions of Se and Si.

http://www.the16types.info/vbulletin...r-IM-elements)

Why not? Especially considering you said this:

"An "extroverted" function defines what an object means."

O.o

...

[Petter]

Why not? Especially considering you said this:

"An "extroverted" function defines what an object means."

O.o

...

I meant 'what an object means to you'. So it must affect a person in some way.

My definition of Se is strongly linked to premotor cortex.

[niffer]

I meant 'what an object means to you'.

Why? These are supposed to be extroverted functions right? "What an object means to you" -- that sounds subjective.

[Petter]

Why? These are supposed to be extroverted functions right? "What an object means to you" -- that sounds subjective.

But I think Jung's (and Aushra's) objective extroverted functions and subjective introverted functions are inaccurate.

All functions are in a sense subjective, as I already have mentioned. For example, if you lift weights you will get stronger. You interact with the weights (Te and Se), and you are affected personally/subjectively.

[niffer]

But I think Jung's (and Aushra's) objective extroverted functions and subjective introverted functions are inaccurate.

All functions are in a sense subjective, as I already have mentioned. For example, if you lift weights you will get stronger. You interact with the weights (Te and Se), and you are affected personally/subjectively.

This is a nonsensical example to bring up because it has nothing to do with cognition. It has to do with physical events. It has nothing to do with judgment or perception.

That being said: Reading your link again, I think I may be getting where you're coming from with extroverted functions/IEs having to do with a defining (almost prescriptive) mindstate. To an extent, it sets broader boundaries for introverted elements to exist as their framework or as the connections in between. Extroverted IEs set the tone and atmosphere. Introverted IEs flesh out and support like a thickening root structure. Both are equally subjective, as all cognition and human experience is subjective.

With how you've worded things though, the difference between what something is and what something means, was hard to sort through, which I'm sure you should be able to understand.

How do you feel about these thoughts? Are they resonant?

This was great food for thought by the way. Thank you.

[Petter]

This is a nonsensical example to bring up because it has nothing to do with cognition. It has to do with physical events. It has nothing to do with judgment or perception.

I disagree with you. There is planning and preparation of training/movements. Those are Te and Se processes (in my view). The actual lifting of weights is related to motor cortex, though.

Both are equally subjective, as all cognition and human experience is subjective.

Yes

That being said: Reading your link again, I think I may be getting where you're coming from with extroverted functions/IEs having to do with a defining (almost prescriptive) mindstate. To an extent, it sets broader boundaries for introverted elements to exist as their framework or as the connections in between. Extroverted IEs set the tone and atmosphere. Introverted IEs flesh out and support like a thickening root structure. Both are equally subjective, as all cognition and human experience is subjective.
With how you've worded things though, the difference between what something is and what something means, was hard to sort through, which I'm sure you should be able to understand.
How do you feel about these thoughts? Are they resonant?
This was great food for thought by the way. Thank you.

It is actually quite simple. Introverted functions are about recognition/identification ("is"), and extroverted functions are about action/behavior ("means").