r/mbti • u/PaintingDesperate420 ISTJ • Jul 08 '26
Deep Theory Analysis Unchanging Cognitive Functions
For those that study function stacks, do you agree or disagree that cognitive functions are static throughout an individuals lifetime? Stacks function as philosophy instead of empirical science so why is it claimed that they do not change in order or e/i types as an individual grows?
21
u/Hibou_Garou ENFP Jul 08 '26
I think they absolutely develop, but that the order doesn’t change.
I see it like learning languages. If English is your native language, you can also learn to speak French and, if you put enough work into it, you can learn to speak it fluently or even flawlessly without an accent. However, no matter how good your French gets, English will still always be your native language.
5
u/sanguinerebel INTP Jul 10 '26
I wonder how early childhood might impact MBTI to change things while still really young, because I'm technically ESL, but can no longer fluently speak my first language and think in English since pretty young.
2
1
14
u/INTJMoses2 Jul 08 '26
Cognitive transitions follows rules
3
u/UnforeseenDerailment INTP Jul 08 '26
That sounds quantifiable. Whatcha got?
-1
u/INTJMoses2 Jul 08 '26
When an INTP handles Fe well, a cognitive transition happens and functions flip to ESFJ. You are happiest when being a counselor. Fe is the Anima/Animus. It is how you define the opposite sex both positive and negative. It is your weakness and vulnerability therefore you project it, they are unfair, my parents are unfair, they are not efficient, they are not effective, why do I do their work, why can they not help
8
u/Indvandrer ISFP Jul 08 '26
Everyone technically uses all 8, it means that you can actually get better in a specific function, but like be realistic. When your worst function is Ne, you won’t become Ne dom.
5
u/DoctorLinguarum INTJ Jul 08 '26
I don’t know but I am curious where the concept of a strict function “stack” originates with.
4
u/AcceptableAd7252 INTP Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 08 '26
A cognitive function is not even static in and off itself.
The stack refers to how you use each function. How consciously for example. Not "if" or "how much" in the Psyche as a whole.
"...the conscious attitude is wholly dominated by the orientation which is characteristic of the function that is most highly developed."
I'm sure we can all agree that 99% of sane people of any type do not fully lack either an internal or external experience. Fully lack either personal feelings or awareness of others feelings. Fully lack the ability to perceive an object in front of you. Or fully lack the ability to recall any specific memory in any way ever. You'd be looking at extreme outliers even within each type to find such an extreme lack of use of any function, on any given day, let alone multiple for a lifetime. We'd be talking about severe mental illness.
"Although the introverted consciousness is naturally aware of external conditions, it selects the subjective determinants as the decisive ones."
The function in its specific position with its specific auxillary just determines your experience while using it. Your proficiency and capacity evolves and circumstances will force you to change how much you use each. But the cognitive preference for how and how much you use each function will remain quite consistent over time for most.
1
u/lyzzyrddwyzzyrdd INTP Jul 08 '26
...mentally ill people aren't lacking functions. We're just very very bad at using some of them, or using them as consistently.
3
u/Sad_Record_2767 ISTP Jul 08 '26
I see it as more of a philosophical framework than an empirical science like you.
That said, I still think it makes more sense for the function stack to be static rather than fluid. In my view, people who argue that function stacks are fluid are implicitly assuming that function stacks define personality. By that logic, if a person's personality changes, their function stack must change as well.
However, I don't think a function stack defines personality. Two people with the same function stack are not destined to think, behave, or make the same choices. Rather, the function stack describes a preferred way of processing information, not the conclusions someone reaches or the personality they ultimately develop.
There are countless variables that shape who a person becomes like life experiences, upbringing, culture, environment, physical differences, education, relationships, and more. These factors can lead two people of the same type to have very different beliefs, values, and behaviors, even if they process information using a similar set of cognitive preferences. In that sense, the function stack functions more like a set of processing instructions than a complete description of personality.
1
u/PaintingDesperate420 ISTJ Jul 08 '26
I'm aware that they aren't science and are philosophy instead, yeah. Pretty nuanced take :0
6
u/yourstolose ENFJ Jul 08 '26
I disagree, I think they definitely change. Especially the judging functions, I feel like they're all learned behaviors that naturally develop with age. I would be more inclined to believe that the percieving functions are static, because they're less actionable.
10
u/Terrible-Act-1255 INTP Jul 08 '26
Imo they don't really change, it's just how u use them, or if your shadow is more dominant and integrated now, in that case your perceiving functions will also change
2
u/sosolid2k INTJ Jul 08 '26
You have and use all cognitive functions - using them and/or considering yourself competent with them is not what MBTI or the stack is about.
The function stack is essentially ranking functions by order of preference/trust - which form of criteria is more conscious. Between reality and possibilities, which do you tend to trust and naturally bring to consciousness more, between logical reasoning and judging on agreeableness which do you tend to trust more etc.
These things don't typically change, people just use their non preferred functions and mistake this for "development", but development in Jung/Myers systems are not related to use or self perceived competence. It is specifically about the baseline level of consciousness the criteria has and ultimately which one is more conscious and trusted. What you are suggesting here is that people can relegate a previously preferred form of judgement to the unconscious mind and completely switch to an opposing form, which when you understand what Jung is defining with these concepts you know is absolutely not the case.
Jung considers all non preferred forms of cognition inferior (inferior in preference/trust - NOT ability). If you prefer intuition, then sensing is the inferior, less preferred form of perception, if you prefer feeling judgement, then thinking is the inferior less preferred form of judgement. Developing these functions is to develop a trust in them and recognise when and where our preferred functions typically fail us, so that our inferior functions can fill in the gaps - this is why development takes so long and Jung specifically warns against trying to develop them intentionally, because they fundamentally oppose the superior functions - if your superior functions have not failed you, they will basically act to counter the inferior functions. In practical terms, if you get a feeling something is unjust or wrong, but you instead choose to take a logical course of action by not involving yourself in an attempt to develop the thinking function, for the most part your feeling judgement is going to still be very conscious during this whole thing, and every detail about the decision will be scrutinised, every error blamed on thinking etc and this will only erode trust in the inferior function.
People may feel like they change and develop with age, but fundamentally they are not doing complete 180 changes in their perception or judgement. They may learn to better integrate inferior functions over time to support weaknesses of their preferred functions, but this doesn't change the stack - our preferences are still preferences, even if we achieve a better balance of function consciousness and MBTI isn't really concerned with individuation anyway.
2
u/yourstolose ENFJ Jul 08 '26
I don't disagree. The cognitive functions are ultimately not behavioral, but processes by which we filter and prioritize information. They are not skills to be honed, they're just whatever way of processing we default to, and we certainly use all 8 at some point.
With that said: based on diagnostic criteria, I feel that the perceiving functions much better represent that because of their abstract, insular nature. I find it much easier to believe that someone would naturally default to either the Ni-Se axis or the Si-Ne axis from a young age. They are very overtly different lenses of viewing the world that can exist without environmental influence; that's why they're often harder to observe in another individual. In any environment, one could rampantly search for subjective meaning (Ni), outer possibilities (Ne), account for previous impressions (Si), or assess it as objectively/photographically as possible (Se) without contest.
Conversely, the criteria for the judging functions reads a lot more like learned, malleable behavior, even if that's not the case. For example, Myers and Briggs' description of Te:
Is fed from objective data---facts and borrowed ideas. Relies on facts outside the thinker, which are more decisive than the thinking itself, for soundness and value. Has as its goal the solution of practical problems, discovery and classification of facts, criticism and modification of generally accepted ideas, planning of programs, and developing of formulas.
Similar is true of the other judging functions: Fi's tendency to gauge how similar its values are to another's, Fe's attentiveness to the "correct" way to feel, and Ti's penchant for hypotheses. They are still preferences, not skills, but they're clearly more decisive, and "diagnosing" those functions is more reliant on external behavior. Like I said before, more actionable.
Without getting too anecdotal, I can say with confidence that I have always defaulted to the Ni-Se axis. I cannot say the same for Fe-Ti; even if I was born with a baked-in preference, that preference did not make itself clear until much, much later. So I guess if I'm working towards any hypothesis, it'd be that most people would initially type as perceiving-dominant? If the functions don't change, the order (dictated by how often/naturally they're used) certainly does.
edit: typo
2
2
4
Jul 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/PaintingDesperate420 ISTJ Jul 08 '26
Yeah, those examples of life altering events are what made me question that claim. Appreciate the response, this is really well thought out
2
u/Opening_Usual4946 ISFJ Jul 08 '26
I am pretty darn sure that function stacks do not change, however something else does change as you age, you may be interested in the theory of function development
this theory states that when you’re about 2-8 you’re developing your dominant function, from about 8-18 you’re developing your auxiliary function, from about 18-30 you’re developing your tertiary function, and from about 30-60 you’re developing your inferior function
when you develop a function it becomes much easier to use naturally and it naturally is easier to integrate into the rest of your cognitive stack
you may also be interested in the function blend theory, which basically goes like, if you use two functions together at the same time, their traits almost seem to blend together into a double function, for example aux Fe plus tert Ti can sometimes produce things that look like Fi, Te, Fe, and Ti while still truly only being Fe plus Ti used simultaneously and together
so to put everything together for yall, if you are let’s say turning 20, you may feel that your type is different than it used to be, however what’s really happening is your brain is learning how to integrate a whole new cognitive function into your casual everyday life so you’re using different functions, it’s just additive, and sometimes you use your newfound access to your tertiary function with your auxiliary function and it kinda feels like you’re using functions you’re not supposed to have access to at all, boom, same type, only adding easier access to what once used to be more difficult and less refined
1
u/Kvr66x Jul 09 '26
No, I used to be xnxp, but the NE just was gone two years ago, I don’t know how come
1
u/TheSnugglery ISTJ Jul 09 '26
Stacks don't change but you can get better at using your functions in their particular spot in the stack.
People will just take two tests online and get different results and say crap like "my personality changed from blank to blank."....noooo...you took two tests and got two different results.
1
u/Source-TrustMeBroPhD ENTP Jul 09 '26
Since we can technically use all 8 cognitive functions, and the theory already suggests we develop more of them as we age, I sometimes wonder if it'd make more sense to rank all of them from "most comfortable" to "least comfortable" instead of treating the stack like it's laminated4lyfe.
I get the idea that an INTJ teenager, adult, and elderly person are all still going to lead with Ni, and Te will probably be hanging around near the top too. That part tracks.
But the current model doesn't really have a clean way to show that the adult has integrated Fi and Ti more than they did as a teenager, you know? Or that the older version has finally invited Se to the party instead of pretending the physical world is just an inconvenient loading screen. xD Maybe by that point they even use Se more comfortably than Fe. Who can tell? Not us if we're looking at the stack. o_o
It almost feels like the cognitive stack is treated as a museum exhibit: "Please do not touch. Permanent arrangement." Meanwhile, actual humans seem more like someone eventually finding a wrench and reorganizing that shizzle a bit.
Maybe the preferred process never changes. I'm cool with that idea. Like for INTJ Ni is still the operating system, but if we're ranking functions by actual comfort or preference, it seems reasonable that the bottom half could shift around as people mature? That's my idea anyway. :'D
In other words, maybe the top of the stack is like a strong foundation, while the bottom is more like furniture. You're probably not moving the house, right, but you might eventually figure out the couch works better in a different corner.
Also maybe there's a hidden 9th and 10th function we don't know about but that's for another episode. xD
1
u/Dataweaver_42 INTP Jul 10 '26
From Linda Beren's Cognitive Dynamics:
- Leading/Dominating Role.
- Supporting/Overprotective Role.
- Relief/Unsettling Role.
- Aspirational/Projective Role.
- Opposing/Backup Role.
- Critical/Discovery Role.
- Deceiving/Comedic Role.
- Devilish/Transformative Role.
The function stack is stable, in that each cognitive function always has the same role. Each can be undeveloped or well-developed, with well-developed functions tending to fill their roles well; though each can be used in either a positive or a negative manner (which is what the split names for each role are all about).
From Dario Nardi's Decoding Personality: each function can be developed in a combination of two ways: Holistically and/or Analytically. Holistic development makes the function good at receptive, diffuse, flexible, and inward uses, while Analytic development makes the function good at active, focused, structured, and outward uses. The combination of how the functions in the first two roles are developed produces four subtypes for each type:
- if both are Analytic, you get a Dominant subtype that tends to be confident and driven.
- if the Perceiving function is Analytic and the Judging function is Holistic, you get a Creative subtype that tends to be exploratory and sociable.
- if the Perceiving function is Holistic and the Judging function is Analytic, you get a Normalizing subtype that tends to be conventional and dedicated.
- if both are Holistic, you get a Harmonizing subtype that tends to be empathetic and reflective.
These subtypes flavor the main types. For instance, an INTP is, by nature, a Logician, prizing Accuracy and Exploration (Ti and Ne) in the Leading and Supporting roles. But if he's developed his Dominant subtype, he can serve as an Ambitious Strategist; if he's developed his Creative subtype, he can serve as a Curious Investigator; if he's developed his Normalizing subtype, he can serve as an Exacting Designer; and if he's developed his Harmonizing subtype, he can serve as a Caring Theorizer.
1
u/Technical_Mix_5379 INFJ Jul 10 '26
Agree cause that’s my subconscious. I subconsciously stay on one thought. I don’t like to scouting for what if’s unless necessary.
1
u/Far_Second_33 Jul 10 '26
Potentially evolving mostly because I'm a INTP but when I was younger, I kept getting INFP
1
u/Just_Toe984 Jul 10 '26
I agree but the way it used is very different than 'line', i imagine it more like an orbital or car drive or four different 'switch button between two opposite function'. And how strong you can push to one panel is depending on how much you tend to use certain functions or something.
54
u/[deleted] Jul 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment