what function is responsible for holding all aspects of the problem (information/data) during a certain thinking process or a situation (almost like the working memory). Like if I'm playing chess, what function is responsible for remembering all the the pieces and their positions. It sounds like Si but i wanna make sure.

I've noticed that a lot of people where if a person who wears baseball caps backwards has bullied them, they assume that all people wearing baseball caps backwards will bully them, it's not something they do on purpose, they just can't separate their past experience from the people they know now.

Maybe this is an Si thing, which would explain why they say Si dominants are the most common, and why this seems common among people, but I'm only going by my experience, and to throw a total wrench in the blender, I'm comparing them against myself, who doesn't equate my past experiences with present people.

Here's how I see it, let's take the bullying thing for example, I've been bullied a lot but I don't think that everyone is going to bully me, I've had just as many if not more experiences with people who were good, so I find it hard to believe that everyone is bad.

There's also the fact that am I really that important that everyone has a personal vendetta against me?

Another thing is, while I'm aware of my past experiences, I don't live in them, that's already happened, I don't feel connected to it at all, but that's stuff that goes deeper than personality but that's not the topic being discussed right now.

I bring that up in case anyone assumes I'm an Ni user based off of that, but if you do think that, I'd like to know your reasoning.

I have a few more questions as well:

- What is the socially appropriate amount of posts to make on here per day?

- Can anyone who isn't an ESxJ explain what Ni-blindspot looks like to them in an ESxJ? Is it being observed in me right now?

- A few days ago, I saw someone say someone was an obvious ESFJ by how their post was written, and I've noticed this in other cases where someone will be like "I don't see any Ti here."

I've gotten to where I can tell some differences in the way people write things, but only as far as Ni-Se vs Si-Ne and even that is only based off limited information, but it is consistent information so to me it carries weight.

Besides that though I don't know much and I want to know the thoughts of people who are good at observing this stuff.

I think this is common after you’ve been immersed in MBTI long enough but I make at minimum a light hearted attempt at typing most people I encounter to try and better interact with them. Because of this, I have developed a bit of an instinctual reaction (lol prejudice) to each type that’s just a soft label for my personal experience with them. Don’t judge me (hypocritical of me to say) because I assume my prejudices are wrong out of principle until they are undeniable. Hopefully it’s entertaining for you:

INFP (big fan): I have a basic understanding of you but nothing I could ever competently maintain as a working understanding. I’m fascinated by you. I root for you. I can’t explain why. When you accomplish things I’m just sitting there wishing I was giving you a high five. When I’m around you I’m in spectator mode. Sorry if that’s creepy or you feel like a zoo animal but (incoming Pokémon reference) my Fi feels like a little Magikarp and yours is Gyrados so I’m like “wouldn’t that be cool?”

ISTJ (teammate): I get along with yall easily. You annoy me when you won’t just admit that you need help with something but I also greatly appreciate when you are willing to do so. We get each other even though we are different. I’m chaos. You’re routine but we are both controlled, direct impact on reality. No one can stop us.

ENFP (mundane adventure pal): if we are doing something not exciting, we make it so. I light the fuse and you add the energy to blow it up. We immerse in enjoying something that isn’t usually so.

ESTJ (ultimate competitor): I try to outsmart everything tried and true, you try to prove to me that it works. We battle. I love it. You love it. No one else understands why it’s that serious but we are just that stubborn.

INFJ (trusty advisor and gossip analyst): every conversation with you feels like one we are having behind closed doors about how everyone operates and what we are doing to navigate it. I can talk to you for hours but we never really hang out.

ISTP (me): sup

ENFJ (banter buddy): let’s pick on each other and make people wonder if we actually hate each other

ESTP (ultimate best friend): let’s go where the wind blows and stop when we narrowly evade death

ISFJ (advisee): you’re sick of giving yourself to stuff that doesn’t work out and you wish you had the ability to care as little as I do sometimes and I love that you find me entertaining and that can so easily give your energy to others. It’s fun being around introverts you complement well.

INTP (my hole filler pause): when I think I’m smart, you tell me what I missed and then we yell at each other and then we are fine. It’s nice being able to debate someone that enjoys breaking things down for fun. I’ve had several “her sister was a witch!” arguments with y’all.

ESFJ (depression killer): real talk, inferior Fe can really get you down when it feels like you’re bad for everyone. Being able to just throw positive attention at you and you be like “more please” without questioning my intentions is real confidence booster. I’m not used to people wanting more of me. Married one of you.

ENTP (humble pie cooker): INTPs criticize my thinking. You criticize my conclusions and come up with 5 other conclusions I could’ve come to. So when I think I’m smart, you be like “lol, I thought that 10 years ago, you’re so cute.” Makes me feel kinda stupid but being ignorantly stupid is my worst nightmare so correct away. Ignore my grumpiness when I don’t wanna be wrong.

INTJ (pissing contest): you challenge my loosey goosey methodology. I pick on your Ti deficiencies to get under your skin. This may be exclusive to me because my older brother is this and I took pleasure in challenging his arrogance, but this relationship very much feels like I’m the bumbling idiot with the Ti weapon you wish you had. I never do it in front of people. This is our special relationship.

ISFP (LOL): we are both unprepared but we are figuring it out. Why’s everyone taking everything so seriously?

ENTJ (motivator): the things you do and say that makes everyone else feel small makes me angry in a highly productive way. We ISTP’s need a little anger to execute sometimes.

ESFP (what are you doing?): I never know. I feel like I am always ruining your flow. I just try to shut up and smile around you and it seems to strengthen our relationship. My mouth gets me in trouble with you at every turn.

This is just my experience. Hope you enjoyed.

Thanks for reading!

Function-attitudinal models have always been a bit of a controversial subject. Some people, for instance, make claims a-la “INTP in MBTI is TiNeSiFe, while LII in socionics is TiNeFiSe, which means they are different types — the latter is a mix of INTP and INTJ!”.

Most people agree with the traditional ABAB, but there are some outstanders, at which I wouldn’t wanna point with my fingers (joke’s on me, I’ll gladly do it).

It needs emphasizing that the author is no advocate of any single function-attitudinal model. Instead, I’ll be speaking in terms of the (supposedly innate) cognitive archetypes introduced by doctor John Beebe and broadly proposed in some socionists’ works. More specifically, I will be using the terms “hero”, “parent”, “child”, “soul”, “nemesis”, “senex”, “trickster” and “demon”, which slightly differ from Beebe’s original naming. There are several reasons for this, the two most important ones being conciseness (in, for example, replacing “opposing personality” with “nemesis” — which, I suppose, Beebe himself might call a bit of a crude simplification, but I myself, not being a person too entitled to labels, accept) and a certain compulsivity (the author firmly believes that the distinction made between the anima and the animus is unnecessary and, perhaps, even harmful to their understanding. The author also tends to view the anima as the complex, the function-attitudinal basis of which is the superid block, thus suggesting to rename the primary archetype of this block to avoid confusion).

The function-attitudinal order is absolutely irrelevant, as long as we’re aware of what psychological type is being talked about, which would mean we’re aware of two archetypes that would define its matrix (hero-soul, but also nemesis-demon) and core (parent-child, but also senex-trickster).

The author will refer to psychological types by the hero-parent pair, commonly known as the ego block.

Jung

According to (as far as I’m concerned, independent) interpretations of Psychological Types made by Isabel Myers and Aushra Augustinavichiute (from now on: “Augusta”), Jung’s main function-attitudinal order was defined as follows:

1.	Hero;

2.	Parent;

3.	Trickster;

4.	Soul.

There are several places in Psychological Types pointing at this, such as:

“the most differentiated function is always employed in an extraverted way, whereas the inferior functions are introverted”.

For example, the SeFi psychological type would be described as SeFiTiNi according to this.

The author must emphasize two things. While it was quite technically Jung himself that introduced the concept of the function-attitudes, he primarily spoke in terms of the functions themselves, differentiating the function-attitudes as mere aspects of them and not individual entities. Jung, thus, quite clearly emphasizes that all eight function-attitudes are present within a human’s psyche, such as here where he talks about the hero’s suppression of the nemesis:

“intuition has its subjective factor, which is suppressed as much as possible in the extraverted attitude”.

MBTI

The most well-known function model used in this area is archetypally defined as follows:

1.	Hero;

2.	Parent;

3.	Child;

4.	Soul.

As described by William Grant and Alan Brownsword.

Socionics

Augusta’s own model is archetypally defined as:

1.	Hero;

2.	Parent;

3.	Demon;

4.	Trickster;

5.	Soul;

6.	Child;

7.	Nemesis;

8.	Senex.

Shortly, Augusta describes the order as ego, superego, superid and id blocks continuously.

While Victor Gulenko’s model, dictated by benefit instead of supervision, is defined as:

1.	Hero;

2.	Senex;

3.	Demon;

4.	Child;

5.	Parent;

6.	Soul;

7.	Trickster;

8.	Nemesis.

In which he distinguishes four blocks of his own: social mission (hero-senex), social adaptation (demon-child), self-realization (parent-soul) and problematic (trickster-nemesis).

An important thing about these examples is that Gulenko himself emphasizes that in practice the two models do not differ:

“Both models, if we do not take implementation-technological aspect, are equivalent and complimentary to each other”.

AABB

First idea we see here is so-called “jumpers”. The concept is based on a crude misunderstanding of the peculiarities of the child, which can become quite an object of obsession for a person, that I see no point in explaining.

A more science-resembling work — well, as science-resembling as something non-scientific (I beg the reader to not equate non-scientific with pseudoscientific. In its essence analytical psychology is as non-scientific as, say, category theory, only that it truly lacks formalization) can get — is presented by one “Akhromant”. I am not here to criticize them for equating the Ni function-attitude with academic intelligence, nor for not understanding what the P vs J dichotomy of MBTI means (for those unaware, it means Pe + Ji (static, also known as reviser) vs Je + Pi (dynamic, also known as conductor), while they think it is perceiving (also known as irrational) vs judging (also known as rational)), nor for typing Carl Gustav Jung as TiSe.

According to them, all “typologists” have been dwelling in ignorance, as, for example, the real function-attitudes of the type they call “ENFP” are Ne-Fe-Ti-Si.

The reader could, perhaps, make an educated guess that they simply got lost in the peculiarities of the senex archetype, thus forming an order of hero-senex-trickster-soul, in which case their “NeFe” would, in fact, be the NeFi psychological type.

However, there are several places in their blog pointing towards all function-attitudes of the order they’re describing being ego-syntonic (while senex and trickster are ego-dystonic), such as with their own understanding of quadras and their translation of “incorrect” typings to their own, “correct” ones (for example, they say INTPs are mistyped “ISTJ”s (Ti-Si-Ne-Fe according to them) or “ENFP”s (Ne-Fe-Ti-Se according to them)), from which one could abduce that the order they are describing is hero-child-parent-soul. Their “ENFP”, thus, is the NeTi psychological type, “INFJ” is the FiSe psychological type, etc.

An important thing to note here is that it is completely irrelevant how one chooses to represent a psychological type, by which name or function-attitudinal order — the actuality of the type’s nature will remain.

The way Akhromant refers to the types reminds me of an encoding way I encountered in CPT (the reader must be infuriated by the sole mention of anti-Jungians like CPT, OPS and alike. I, however, must assure you that I do not condone their perversions, merely presenting an interesting part here). More precisely, they, just like Akhromant, encode the positive (or inert) functions. For example, the SeFi psychological type would be referred to as eST (Se and Te). I do not, however, consider this way of referring to types as particularly useful, instead viewing it as simply amusing.

Conclusion

I must yet again emphasize that the order in which the function-attitudes are described is irrelevant. It’s not about how “strong” they are, it’s about which archetypes they’re manifested through, which, in turn, are independent of the number you choose or choose not to label them with.

for all INTJs in this place. how do you make new friends. im trying to get out of my comfort zone, and its realy hard

One of my friends made me take like 4 tests and they all came to this,whats that mean about me? I tried google but it gives to many different answers.

What’s your MBTI type and who is your favorite author?

SO I have an INTJ (male) bestie right? I’m an ENFP (female). and I sadly and yes I say sadly because I genuinely loved our relationship fell in love DEEPLY and MADLY obsessively. And my cousin (INTP, male) thinks INTJ likes/liked me. There was a time where I think he wanted me to kiss him but we were drunk and I was confused and I was like “what are you doing” and then he just like stopped doing what he was doing. AND bro the way this guy looks at me hes actually gaslighting me into thinking I’m crazy. I just I can’t. So therefore why won’t the INTJ come forward and say something is it because I turned him down the first time? I didn’t mean to I was just genuinely like saying what you doing cause I didn’t know what to say and I wanted to continue and now I’m just like UGHHHHHHHHHHHHH And I know INTJS aren’t really affectionate or touchy unless friends/lovers and he’s always touching me. Ruffling my hair or poking my ribs or tryna play fight with me and I JUST NEED HELPOO

I’ve encountered a problem when taking personality tests, every time I take one I get a different result for perceiving and judging each time the difference being under 5%. I don’t know what to do in these situations as the tests can change basically due to anything (Time of day, academic situation, environment, etc). I believe that personality should have the ability to change based on the circumstances but now this idea has likely lead me to this issue.

The test scores are as follows:

Perceiving 5 times (51%, 51%, 54%, 52%, and 53%)

Judging 8 times (53%, 56%, 52%, 55%, 55%, 52%, 53%, 54%)

Once on a random site it was split perfectly 50/50 (Idk if the site was reputable tho, all other tests taken on 16 personalties site)

Any advice on what I should do or if there are anyways to fix this?

INFP, I want to be able to talk to people but it’s so unnecessarily difficult for me to just strike up a conversation and keep it going with someone I’m not familiar with. I like socializing I’m just so bad at it please help 😭

First time I took it, I had ENFP. Okay. I took it few months later again. ISFP. Okay..? Recently I feel like I've become more of a thinker rather than feeler. Also I feel like I should be extroverted rather than introverted. But I'm 90% sure I can not be an ESTP. I am at an absolute loss, like is this even possible?

Just curious, have a nice Sunday

Is your MBTI 100% accurate when you’re a teen? I read your MBTI can’t change, but your brain doesn’t fully develop until you’re 25 iirc.

What do you guys think of CS Joseph’s 4 sides theory (for determining nurture). I like how it lets you see the variation within personality types, and lets you see how other types in a person’s mind manifest.

Also ppl kinda hate CSJ bc he presents himself weirdly and bc he’s harsh on infps and intjs (and more) but i think his theories hold a lot of merit.

I particularly like his ideas on cognitive orbit and axis, and how you can develop certain functions with it, like how an INFP/INTP can develop Ne parent by making more risky decisions (Ni cognitive orbit).

I no longer doubt my type, I've been down many roads, and they've all led me to the same conclusion, some had me questioning my map for a moment, but in the end, I found my way.

However I'm insecure about how other people perceive me.

What if they don't think I'm an ESTJ based on the stereotypes or what they know? What if they believe something that is in no way true?

I know MBTI isn't an exact science, and you can't 100% know your type, but from everything I know, there's really no way I could for example be an ESFP, but people might assume that based off of misinformation or lack of looking deeper and considering alternative possibilities as to why someone of one type might be coming off as another type in that moment.

This is important to me because if you want the science to work, it needs to be as accurate as possible, and it can't be accurate if it's going off of false readings, and I like when things are accurate.

Can anyone else relate to this? Especially other Te Doms?

I am a fan of color.
I look at the 16Personalities website and see the grouping of four in colors of;
Purple for Analysts
Green for Diplomats
Blue for Sentinels
Yellow for Explorers

This is fine! Though my curiosity is getting the better of me….
What if we applied cognitive functions to the color wheel?
My initial idea;

Intuitive and Observant is Blue and Orange
Thinking and feeling is Red and Green
Judging and Prospecting is Purple and Yellow
Extroverted and Introverted would then affect color saturation.

By placing yourself at the center of the color wheel to start, you would then move the position according to the percentage you are in each area.
For example;

If you got a 60% on the first one, you would move the position 60% towards the edge from the starting position.

This would be more easily done by those who are proficient in art, painting, mixing the different palettes together. In which I, am not.

THUS, applying this concept to computers, websites, CSS!
Which uses RGB (red, green, blue) but then how would this be implemented?

For each of these there is a 0-255. We start with each one at 128.
You apply your percentage to each one.
For example, if we keep Intuitive and Observant as “Blue”,
you would add your percentage if Observant and
minus your percentage if Intuitive.

Thinking and feeling would then be Red;
Feeling would add, and thinking would minus your percentage.

Judging and Prospecting would then be Green;
Prospecting would add, and Judging would minus their percentage.

Finally, extroversion and introversion would be based on saturation, but saturation is 0-100.
Start it at 50. Divide your percentage by 2. Then add if you are extroversion and minus if you are introversion.

The biggest issue with applying it this way is that INTJs would be dark and colorless.
Sorry INTJs!

Also missing an application for assertive and turbulent.

This idea came from watching the anime Psycho-Pass season 2.

I would also be interested in seeing how this might apply to people.
What is your favorite color? Would it align with the MBTI type you find most attractive?

For instance, intellectually, my favorite color is purple but I find solace in navy blue, forest green and maroon; all dark shades of color.

 - Your local INFP =)

https://preview.redd.it/morlja40iqyd1.jpg?width=934&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=781fc145c9d894793e8e21124e973e0fe1e3e0ac

I'm curious, what is the MBTI of the YouTuber called Dr Izzy Sealey? Is she an ISFJ? I can't tell but I think she's Ti and Fe in her functional stack but not sure in what order. Thanks

I've been reading about cognitive functions for years now yet I still cannot wrap my head around what Ni is. Could anyone explain in a way that's a little more simple to understand? Or is Ni really just that complex that it just cannot be simplified?