Love going over the in's and out's of these things! I often find it interesting the surprising connections I can sometimes make with other people over some of these very functions. For example when organizing a social event, there is often I think a learned cooperation between Fe- and Te-, as Fe-doms will often recognize that people get along better when things are running smoothly behind the scenes, and a Te- user such as myself understands that people are more likely to allow things to run smoothly if they are all getting along with each other! I find it's surprising how often my help is requested for social events but I find that I can carry the arrangements while the Fe-doms carry everyone's enthusiasm and it makes for a good show, it's amazing how it all works out. Have had many an in-depth Te-Ne discussion with ESTJs as well! It never gets boring
Dark side Harry: "This is challenging material." Good side Harry: "But you can do it! :)" Dark side Harry: "But this is new material beyond your smooth brain." Good side Harry: "I love working on this stuff :)"
I love this network theory you are elaborating. Looking forward to the even more distant "Tetritary" and "Inferior" versions hidden functions, and how they interact with the core type! I also like you briefly explored the nuances of differences of IxxJ/ExxP perceptual dominant types in contrast with IxxP/ExxJ types. It's argued to even be a way to divide two kinds of people based on other typology systems that highlights this extensively.
Great video Harry, so informative as always; btw it's Emma from the patreon. I remember prior to being typed by you that I was fairly sure I was an INTJ. I can see why many ENFJs especially divergent more socially ambiverted or introverted subtypes might mistype as an INTJ. I certainly (although they're worthless) always type as an INTJ on MBTI tests which I can see why with having a proclivity towards thinking, introversion socially, abstract thought processes (TiNi) and being rather organised & not spontaneous throughout the course of my life. I've also noticed I have a highly active INTJ subnetwork: I guess I lean more into my introverted networks as a divergent ENFJ. I really hope you can do a video on divergent subtypes: why they manifest and what keeps one within the confides of this subtype as this isn't really expounded upon on the wiki or in the ebook to my knowledge. Any plans to do this? Thanks for your continued dedication Harry and a happy new year to you 😊
Thank you for your work on this. Clarity of this framework really helped my overly mechanistic brains to grasp how differently people can operate. I do enjoy classic/arcane/mystical Jungian models too but I feel they often are more useful for self-reflection in spiritual sense, bit like religion for trauma work. This model is much less clunky in evyryday use, great work!
Hey Harry! At last, network theory series. In an old video you’ve mentioned that INFJ, being in stress or under the pressure, might’ve become more socially strict and demand the order from people around. This is perfectly correlate with ESFJ being the auxiliary network for an INFJ. Also INFJ, being pretty covert type, might be pretty easy mistyped as an ESFJ. As an ESFJ could’ve been taken for the ISTJ (ESFJ’s auxiliary network) in a stress response.
@@courierquest5345 100%! Types can of course act in all sorts of ways when stressed but those that lean on their authority position are going to be more likely - FeNe in the case of the iNT and TeNe in the case of the iNF. I do notice the more we're pushed the more we tend to default to what is familiar, so the stress response will often be something that is sustainable e.g. a divergent subtype or leaning on a preferred auxiliary
@@CognitivePersonality So true. I might’ve also add that person leaning in his auxiliary type might became somewhat of a parody on this type. Like a divergent ENTJ spreading Ni-insights in both ISFP and INFJ manner to the point of complete obliviousness about his convergent thinking. It is also a little bit of a scary that person might never became consciously in touch with his convergent pairing.
Finally, you have discovered another aspect of advanced socionics. The INTJ, as formulated as an NiFi, is actually an ILI, and from there, you actually derived all of the 'process' types within socionics. 🤓
@@zhaoli4608 It is cool how Socionics also maps out network theory theory Results and Process! I think in that system it's more to differentiate between categories than suggest movement? Really awesome how the two systems keep lining up though
That's cause the two theories use the same structure to study two different sides of the mind. It's like using the same ruler to measure your arm and your leg. In both cases you're measuring a person's length in a sense and there are correlations but neither is able to capture the full complexity of the person.
ISTPs generally like to expertise in field they are interested in while as INTJ I would only want to know things enough for being efficient being Te authority . INTJs could be exploring and learning things via NiFi by reconstructing the knowledge with their own thoughts and experience while ISTPs would be more likely to go by the book and rather learn things logically than emotionally like INTJs
At age 64 years my path may have been similar but perhaps with an opposite (for now) outcome. Despite it being suggested I have never been formally diagnosed as being 'autistic' (please excuse my unfamiliarity with current terminology) but job-related PF tests (military and civilian) dating back to my early twenties and a recent MBTI test indicate INTJ. This is where I'm most comfortable, I guess. Very best wishes.
It’d be pretty cool if you do more mbti analysis of movie or fictional characters, really liked those. ESPECIALLY do breaking bad, feel like that ones mandatory like Star Wars was
Very interesting! While I suspect *how this might express itself, more specifically, will vary,* I wonder if the “hidden cognitive function pairs” are more-or-less the same for ENTPs since ENTPs are also N-F-T-S, just with flipped natured energy orientations? Either way, this is so fascinating! I hope you enjoyed your holidays and more videos like this please!!!
@@debbieramos-galvan104 Exactly so! The difference in gateways makes it worth making a video for each type but ENTPs ISFJs ESFPs have the same networks in common. So this'll be a series Thank you and likewise!
TiNi>FiSi>TeNe>FeSe in terms of relatability. I wonder if topography might become an intuitive individuation visualisation tool in illustrating very similar personalities. Specifically 'saddle points' which are used to describe the landscape of chemical transitions. Imagine rising to a 'bealach' which is the apex of a pass but also the lowest point which connects 2 peaks. Here, energy permitting you are in the best position to either retrace your steps, descend into another glen or rise to either peak in the shortest of orders. Perhaps differing neurotransmitters of choice might lower the saddle point altitude access route to say FeSe in one 'twin' and TeNe in another.
Oh well, another video about INTJs. I can't say I'm disappointed because it still strokes my ego to watch another video by you about my type, although I'd also watch a video about some underrated type such as ISFJ which I find to be more and more fascinating as there are some ISFJs that fit the vanilla, normal-type stereotypes. But with my recent research some then there are such ISFJs as Brian May, William Gibson who are incredibly deep thinkers and philosophers to the point they are constantly typed as INTJ, INFJ etc.. Just a food for thought. Maybe you'll touch that in future. Nevertheless, a good and interesting video. I've always identified deeply with my Ti-Ni and I've always found connections between concepts, insights with ease to further my goals. Same with Te-Ne. I find that me and most INTJs I've seen switch between Te-Ne and Te-Se seamlessly, all the time when discussing for example. Fi-Si is truly liberating when mastered as emotional regulation is king. But I was surprised to say that you've never met disregulated INTJs. I've met some with, including one with clinical diagnosis of cluster-B PDs and those were the cases akin more to stereotypes - chimeric, choleric and just unpredictable. But true enough they were few. And finally you say that Fe-Se is that hidden pathway. There is also truth with that. But I only use it with my closest ones. Maybe some day I'll come to a conclusion that using Fe in such an intense manner with people I do not know intimately is not betraying myself. But not today. Thanks for another video
Hi Harry, sorry me again! I'm wandering as an ENFJ if you can help me decide what network I'm primarily leaning on as a stress response. Note, you typed me as a divergent ENFJ. I'm currently in a pretty depressive phase & I feel like I've moved out of FeSe convergence in fact I don't socialise with anybody including intimate relationships. I was wandering whether ISFJ might be worth considering but despite my SiTi flow states I seem to be focusing entirely on existential matters (more like existential doom lol). I'm trying to reconfigure myself to face the challenging I have ahead when going back to work. Apologies I know this is very vague but any help would be appreciated. I'm also finding it very difficult to do anything practical - I literally, for the most part, exist within the confides of my own mind. My thinking, when I'm well is usually highly verbal but now it's much more vague & emotion laden but almost in a stilted kind of way, as in it's not emotionally intense? Any ideas?
Hey Harry! If due the typing service you type person as an INTJ and your second guess is an ENTJ - does this speak highly about the work person already made on his cognition? Since those types are far cry from each other in many ways. Kudos!
Hello Harry! Thank you for the video! I watched the video out of curiosity, being an entp. I'd like to ask you that in the same pattern would these function pairings be the hidden function for the entp? TE-NE/TI-NI/FE-SE/FI-SI And lastly, would it be possible for you to do these types of videos for other types? thank you, see you next month!
@@incireçine I'm planning on making this a full video series! Might change the presentation/title based on how this one is received. And yeah same for ENTP!
Hey Harry! Am I right that amongst Te+ types, besides ENFP the most consistent Ne-type is actually ENTJ, not an ESTJ? ENTJ’s Ne is prevalent, but subdued to the Ni (enriching it with new ideas and scenarios e.g.), as I guess. Kudos!
I think generally speaking it would depend on the gateway from which Ne is accessed. ENFPs and ESTJs would have Ne as a primary gateway and thus would be convergent Ne since they’re both extroverts. However the ESTJs would be hyper convergent owing to it being in agency position, making it more intense and egotistical than that of the ENFP. For ESFPs and ENTJs, Ne is dipped into from Se or Ni, since it’s not a primary gateway function. An ENTJ dips into FeNe, and an ESFP dips into NeFe. If the ENTJ dips into FeNe from a TeSe gateway, it will be FeNe+ since TeSe for an ENTJ is convergent (so will be more ESFJ like). But if an ENTJ dips into FeNe from FiNi, it will be FeNe- (and thus more INTP-like). It’ll be similar for the ESFP, where they can be more ENTP-like or ISFJ-like depending on whether they’re accessing NeFe+ or NeFe-. Hope that helps :)
@@pazzy768 Hey man! Thanks for the reply. As I recall, authority function in CPT is more conscious than agency (which is still convergent). Because of this, authority function tend to reach its counterpart more constantly than agency. For example, ISFJ, via Fe, would reach Fi more constantly than Te via Ti (even though ISFJ’s Ti is more convergent). So to speak, ENTJ and ENFP both intuitive compulsive type, while ESFP and ESTJ both sensing compulsive - it means both latter types have a more easy oscillation between Se-Si. To prove my words, you can check out kid Anakin (ESTJ) typing: second type Harry assumed was an ESFP - due to how constant were Se-employment of Anakin in first film. Take care!
That is actually a very good question! I also wonder between say, intuitive compulsive and sensing compulsive types (even though their convergence is different) how does that compulsivity play a factor in their overall behavior/impression that they give off etc (if it does). And is that the reason why some types are thought of as "intuitives" and others as "sensors" even though their actual dominant functions are the opposite (if you get what I mean). The comment above explained the dip functions very well.
@@phoenixxsoul Thanks for the comment! I would assume that the overall difference between Sensing/Intuitive compulsive types is in tendency to immediate desicions. Intuitive compulsion generally implies more laidback or playfull approach to the immediate reality, spending a little bit more time in your head. This tendency applies mainly to the default subtypes, because obviously convergent subtypes of ENxJs shows more tenacity. While convergent ESxPs or ESxJs be more playful and scatterbrained. This is my 5 cents, hope it make some sense. Kudos!
A couple questions: first: Don't INTJ's have FE Blindspot, which implicates, that they generally like to switch FE with TE and thus more gladly use Ne-Te as a lens dominant/lens oppositional dip? second: When looking at the "true" auxiliary processes, which functions then, take over the role of the two main functions, which make up the bedrock of identity for a given type. For example when looking at the INTJ: which function takes over the NI-FI convergent function and the SE-TE divergent one? I mean out of these true auxiliaries there must be two functions, which are comparably used with a higher preference than the other two remaining functions, right or no? third: What about the "true" tertiaries and the true oppositionals? Are you then using the same method when determining them like you would with the determination of the true auxiliaries? That is for the true tertiary switching again to lens dominant/lens oppositional mode with the following function-stacks: SI-FI, NE-TE, SE-FE, NI-TI; And for the true oppositionals: codec dominant/codec oppositional mode, with: FI-NI, TE-SE, FE-NE, TI-SI; If I'm right about this, is the order of the function-states correct, or do I swap the true tertiaries including its condition described above with the true oppositionals? --- I hope the questions are somewhat intelligible... Can you help me out with these? Best regards from a crazy CPT nerd :^)
The Fe blind-spot does not mean an INTJ does not have vision (metaphor for Fe), it's more like the blind spot when driving, it's something you can concours with a shoulder check if you put conscious effort into learning it and internalizing it bit by bit..
@@heeropeero8919 So the Fe blind thing is more true *within the dominant network* than outside of it. This is because an Fe dominant auxiliary network is still passing through NiFi dominance first, and therefore won't have all of the socionervous stuff of an actual eFS Yeah exactly accurate for the authority and oppositional networks!
Hey Harry! Sorry for an endless array of questions, your content is just too stimulative for some reason😅 Does what we casually call “money game”: increasing the income, constant grinding, getting a corporeal promotion - is more of a Ti-Fe domain, mostly common amongst Ti dom/auth? I can imagine ISTP or ENTP keeping money as the constant objective value (without any malicious intent of course). In many ways, getting money helps to keeps things as they are, or change ‘em in a predictable way - which seems Ti-ish in CPT. Kudos!
Worth mentioning my fiancé is an ESFP with quite an ESTJ subnetwork going on & he's very money oriented. I think the rationale behind it though is not money for moneys sake but rather to enable him to lead a comfortable lifestyle so he has the full capacity to actualise himself in fitting with his Fi authority. He's all about promotions at work & 'the next goal'. I don't think money & the accumulation of wealth is particularly pertinent to any one type in particular but rather the reasons for doing this may be, in general, slightly different for each type. I'm a divergent ENFJ btw & I have to say as long as I have enough expendable income I'm really not that bothered like the lazy bum I am lol.
@@AnyaAnnika67 Heya! Thanks for the savvy reply 👋 My hunch is that “making money for the sake of money” (considering this as a very specific sort of motivation) is an approach more natural for Ti-compulsive types. While both ENFJ and ESFP are F-compulsive. Still, I can perfectly see both latter types generating enough wealth for themselves, not a matter of a type. Take care 💪
Irrelevant tests have letters on a continuum. J/P swaps all 4 functions, and T/F as well as S/N swaps 2, so one cannot take any of those tests and get a reliable answer. I type as INTP on every one of those tests but i'm a likely ENTP. I'm a lucky one. INTJs are more similar to ISFP than INFJ or INTP in any useful system. That shows why it doesn't work
I wouldn't rely on tests. I've been typed by CPT as a divergent ENFJ yet on tests I consistently type as INTJ with a high thinking score - it's hardly surprising as the ENFJ is a TiNi divergent type. I'd highly recommend Harry's services to figure out your most likely type.
@@CognitivePersonality Very interesting take, because he has this booksmart-STEM-tenure-academia archetype, not fitting the stereotypic view of what is Se-Te+. Not the first person you would associate with the impulse behaviour. Although, people have noticed already, how stubborn he may be in pushing his agenda (causing massive annoyance in twitter/reddit e.g.). Cheers👋
@courierquest5345 Yeah Fi Auth or Se dominance (which are more traits than processes) don't necessarily mean impulsive. Plus I've met plenty of PhD ESFPs. Pretty misunderstood type
@@CognitivePersonality Not necessarily misunderstood, CPT just got its own definitions allowing to type person as an eST, the mutual with MBTI here is abbreviation foremost 👍
I’ve been typed as INTJ, ESTJ, ENTJ, depending on which site I use😅 question is - is there a point to get so exact about typing? Or just be versatile and lean in on whatever works in the situation! It’s like this quest for truth - but why? And who is holding the key to the truth? Maybe Harry is 😂 but do I need to find out for what point! Is the question
@@567ohyeah Honestly this is my favourite sort of comment because it points to the elephant in the room - people do have dispositions on the cognitive level but what one person means by INTJ could be ISFP to another person, and so on. All my videos are coherent within the cognitive framework I work with, but an INTJ will still be understood slightly differently in CPT (emphasising their existential regulation) to certain MBTI interpretations (emphasising their analytical depth and/or industriousness). So there *is* a truth but it's always nested within the system you're working with. I try to get around this ambiguity of construct by opening up the type to dips and auxiliary networks - not just because they're consistent with reality but because it encourages people to see types as maps of cognition through which they can expand their minds and get a genuine *use* out of it beyond just feeling seen and validated. You have the right mindset!
@@CognitivePersonality I don't think there's any getting away from the fact that CPT is a superlative typology comparative to the likes of MBTI however. As you said Harry, MBTI very much favours a very static definition of the INTJ emphasising their analytical prowess and, whats more ascribing personality facets that bare very little relation to cognitive type and in many cases are damn right bogus (eg the Machiavellian INTJ). I like the direction CPT is going in with the ability to expand our cognitive gateways and the emphasis on the interrelations between types. Honestly I frequent many MBTI groups & for the vast majority of people there's too much of an emphasis on creating very distinct archetypes that contain an individual, prescribe what someone cannot do and very fractious relationships between people of another cognitive type. For this reason, I've parted ways with MBTI. Being an ENFJ, I don't relate to any of the ENFJ archetypes whatsoever in fact despite being typed by you I'm most often accused of being mistyped because I don't fit their narrow definition with the great irony being, the vast majority in the group are probably mistyped themselves. It's a shame for many people that cognitive type has become so embroiled with their identity and used as an excuse as to why they can or cannot do something. Even worse are the stereotypes projected against other people. On the macro level there's more similarities between people than there are differences - it's on the micro level however that it gets really interesting. Also Harry, someone mentioned on the patreon that FeSe+ is effectively consecrated TiSi+, can you explain that to me please?
@@The.Zen.Diogenes Sure! See how in the diagram NiFi dips into SiTi and NeFe? It's the same on the network level. See iNF cognition as being surrounded by a ring, much like Saturn. This ring contains auxiliary processes that can also dip into each other. So the type can access TeNe TiNi FiSi FeSe, processes that are on the same plane of movement so can also dip into each other. The arrows represent fluidity. The only thing wrong about the diagram is that auxiliary dipping is not one-directional. Technically FeSe can go into FiSi and vice versa. Hope that makes sense!
Beautiful. Thanks for this fantastic lecture. Do you think it is best for all these functions in the auxiliary networks to be used in near-balance? Or can you be focused on tene + fisi & the dominant network more so than tini & fese, whilst having just enough focus on them to keep our cognition harmonious. Thus you’d have more cognitive energy / reservoir for working on the tertiary/inferior networks as supports for the dom & aux network?
@@haniyehsheibani I think it's definitely safe to lean more on one auxiliary process for an extended period of time so long as you keep checking in with the others. E.g. I have a current eTS auxiliary but still check in with iTS iFN and eFN
How synchronous.. I was doing something similar drawing figures of each type with dominant, reverse and shadow and how these can develop.. then I meditated on how the dominant function colours everything (critical parent, 4th spot Se-(NSi) lending itself to internal martial arts), rememembered how I unsubscribed here because of something i disagreed with buut my new thoughts had similarities so I re-subscribed.. and there comes similar but different take on INTJ zen-mastery just in time 😂 We can indeed do everything and transcend Still is my concious just Ni using the the others I wonder.. am I accessing Fi and Se right now as distinct ego processes or Ni playing with toys.. hmm
I am a convergent INTP with a strong ISFP side and strong ISTJ/INFJ auxiliaries. So strong that for a while I was confused about my primary and auxiliary network. I have a question about the correlation of CPT and Enneagram. Would you say that a CPT type could be any enneagrm type or not? Or maybe the two personality theories are not compatible at all?
@@xripkan6623 My suspicion is that a CPT type can be mapped onto a sort of *enneagram spectrum*, but having a kind of nature-level enneagram doesn't mean they won't have an additional nurture-level enneagram from their upbringing
Do CPT types align more with MBTI stereotypes or socionics? Or neither I find socionics are far more accurate at describing certain types and these types allign more with CPT than mbti
I know this is a lot off-topic but he is my ranking of all the types most overrated to most underrated let me know if you agree Very overrated INFJ INTJ ENTP Overrated ENTJ ENFP INTP INFP ENFJ Underrated ISTP ISFP ESTP Very underrated ESTJ ESFP ISTJ ISFJ ESFJ
According to my observations, i do not really agree with you about over simplifying the impact of stress (4:52). Where I agree with you that the "grip" thing is rather a simplistic idea, I do not really agree about your overgeneralised statement saying " INTJs are generally conservative of their enegy, therefore this " in case of stress. There are life situations imposing on the individual to act out of their usual comfort zone. While it can be true about some INTJs to remain conservative of their energy in cases of stress, that's only relative to the situation they are facing, I hardly imagine someone falling under the category of an INTJ who would go like : " meh i keep my energy " in front of a pressuring situation that requires a strong response, where you either give it all or simply get crushed. You are not specifying the degree of stress either. All in all, you seem to dismiss an important factor about the human brain, its primary role is to sustain your survival in a given environnement by setting the required behaviour, which of course contradicts your attempt on setting a model that takes into account one of your commercial logos : " fluidity ". You seem rather rigid in your perspective which makes me also wonder if you are not making an Islamic case out of a judeo-christian paradigm i.e. trying to use the same biblical stories in order to erect a supposedly new religion. While indeed we have a new religion, you don't seem to drop the spirit of old MBTI stereotypes either. Which lead us to another important aspect, this whole battery like energy doesn't seem to apply to all the population of INTJs. Where all INTJs agree on the fact that they are conservative of their energy due to the role of Se according to CPT, this doesn't tell much about how much volts each INTJ possesses . According to how much voltage an INTJ has, an INTJ can afford what another INTJ cannot afford and that is what can surely be a source of mistyping if we settle for such loose statements as yours. Maybe the INTJs that you have met up until now helped you form a generalistic overview of how an INTJ should show up, this can be quite contradicting to your declaration where CPT is a model that is interested in the individual as a unique case rather than making him fall under a statistical observation. From your videos, you seem to say the topic you are dealing with is "complex" (which is becoming redundant after many years) when it allows you to run away from giving the full explanation of your ideas, but you seem to dismiss the complexity of human cognition when it fits your agenda. This makes me question whether you backed up your statements with scientific evidence or not. It also makes me wonder if the topic you are dealing with is only complex to you. I would rather surmise this as a failure to communicate your ideas to a public that isn't well versed into typology as a whole. Where I kind of sense in you some eagerness to criticise ideas that do not fit your taste, such as the grip thing (which is, again, obviously a shallow idea and that can be an excuse for you so to not consider the individual as a unique case of a given type), it doesn't seem that you are having the same proclivity towards pondering whether your statements are not kind of simplistic and insufficient to describe reality as it is.
I agree that each INTJ's energy level may vary when it comes to stress, so I understand the statement "INTJs are generally conservative of their energy" may or may not apply to most INTJs. Similarly, someone with a low sense of competence will most likely avoid any potential failure that may lower their confidence. That type of psychological need is vital for our survival, and a low level of competence (or other needs) will lead to avoidance to conserve that level. I wouldn't say, according to CPT, the role of Se is a small package battery. I don't think that's the case at all. Most INTJs are sensitive to their environment, being highly attuned to the details while categorizing those details. And overall, most people who are sensitive to their environment will be very attentive to their energy level to avoid feeling drained. Especially It might stem from their preference for efficiency and focus for the INTJs, so being careless about their energy level is less likely when dealing with stress. So, I see the logic behind that generalized statement, but how can we be certain INTJs will rotate their axis when they feel highly stressed? I imagine their object recognition (PSI Theory) is innately more active, and since they value Te, they'll probably be in a goal-oriented mode to deal with that stress. Everyone is different, though. Why +SeTe? How can we be certain this will likely happen? I am curious. Your concerns are reasonable. It would be helpful if he supported his claims with empirical evidence and more examples. However, I do want to point out that your critique seems to prioritize rhetorical flourishes over clarity, and maybe it would be a lot harder for Harry to read your comment. Especially the assumptions and ad hominem overtones (e.g. religion part). Overall, reasonable concerns
@@AxelPresniyakov Excellent critique! CPT is a situational system so if anything I say comes across as "INTJs are energy conservative and therefore hold on to their energy in each and every situation" this is a failure to represent my ideas. Empirical research I have myself conducted indicates how situational personality is. But this is why CPT is a fluid model that has uncertainty built into it. If we are talking about types we are talking about a categorical construct across what is in reality a spectrum of individual variation. All statements are insufficient descriptions of reality. I use terms just as 'generally' for this reason. A system is stronger when it can adapt to reality rather than prescribe what it should be. I think it's far safer to dismiss something like grips as highly unusual than to arbitrarily prescribe something that a naturally energy conservative type - by it's very definition - is somehow bound to do when it gets stressed. You're right though - CPT at the core is all about individual variation and I should be more cautious in future speaking in absolutes as this betrays the essence of the system
@@AxelPresniyakov I would add many would take issue with your religious analogies here which certainly don't do your argument many favours. Keep in mind indulging in sensory overload and going on binges isn't a great example of the human brain adapting to its environment. I don't think I ever made out in the video INTJs being unable to draw upon reserves of energy nor go into other type modalities more befitting the situation. I feel contradictions have been drawn here where there are none. As I mentioned I will certainly be even more cautious in making general statements about unique instances, but on a second read I couldn't help but notice the straw man
@@CognitivePersonality We both agree that the aim of CPT is great but your way of presenting things fails to represent the system. While you never seemed to be bothered by the language you are using in order to depict reality, you seemed quite confident at transforming statistical observations into generalistic statements. You set a cognitive layout, but to give life to the respective layouts associated to each type, you still use generalistic statements based on your observations. I never stated that a type cannot go to other types modalities in order to adapt, that's actually what I was defending about your system since it is your marketing logo and that the cognitive layout you defined allows to take into account. I would rather suggest you to focus on cognitive processes and back up your statements with scientific evidence more and more rather than count on behavioural cues that cannot be generalised to all individuals of a given type. The definition of your types are tied up to what you personally see, not tied up to an intrinsic definition related to your definition of the cognitive layout, which is quite questionable for a cognitive approach. In fact, the way you defined your cognitive layout is supposed to study the individual, not state absolutes. Again, I told you that the grip idea is simplistic. What I actually said is that your way of explaining your point of view dismisses the situation to which a type can be facing. You are attacking the grip idea which is quite a shallow attempt and that has no real utility. Let's say it in another way : " you are making it look that you dismiss the idea of grip that is a source of mistyping all the while you are asserting that the INTJ acts in a specific manner in response to stress". Concretely, you are not defining what kind of stress and you seem to neglect the fact that not all people are living a life that can be conceived by your statements. You attack uselessly the idea of grip (which is already a simplistic idea without any doubt) in order to say that is a source of mistyping all the while your undefined statement is a real source of mistyping. Do you understand it or not ? Let me frame it again for you : you are making it look that you are making a valid case by dismissing other ideas which have already been classified as irrelevant in order to explain certain phenomenon so to make your case which is inherently empty and cannot be supported by the way you defined the cognitive layout of CPT. You do not seem to be aware of your own contradictions. Clearly you don't seem bothered. Jumping on my religious analogy explains how much you do not seem to take time reading people's comments. The religious analogy bothered but you didn't seem to be bothered about the fact that you are portraying CPT as an individual case system in order to differentiate yourself from MBTI practitioners, you though use the same old stroke. Again, I never said that going on binges is a sign of good adaptation, I said that what you consider as binges is rather vague and ambiguous, which again, we are very used to with your channel. Though, you don't seem to weigh how extreme situations can impact people. I doubt very strongly that you have ever lived warfare or at least lived in regions of the world where war is still raging with devastating conflicts. That's for the most extreme. Less extreme, we can speak of abusive households. Again, what do you define as binges ? No one really knows. So please, indulge us with your scientific evidence or at least explain to us why you ignored the impact of the limbic system in all parts of the brain? If we are studying a brain that is constantly creating networks, why do you define things in such a radicalistic manner ? It is either your types live in a platonic world or you simply fail to present your case correctly. All in all, you are making a strawman out of my statements which is quite honorable of you, you didn't disappoint me on this one. I am proud of you.
@Honey-Bunches-of-Oots I agree that each INTJ's energy level may vary when it comes to stress, so I understand the statement "INTJs are generally conservative of their energy" may or may not apply to most INTJs. Similarly, someone with a low sense of competence will most likely avoid any potential failure that may lower their confidence. That type of psychological need is vital for our survival, and a low level of competence (or other needs) will lead to avoidance to conserve that level." You seem to dismiss other details that I emphasised. While it is true that I mentioned the variation of energy levels according to stress, you seem to dismiss the " individual case " where I said that not all INTJs have the same natural energy level regardless of stress. Why did you miss it ? I don't know. Based on a natural energy level related to each individual and depending on the degree of stress, you can expect different levels of reactions that will not fit in the eye of the observer who has a rigid perspective of how INTJs is very likely to appear, THAT is a real source of mistyping. Appearantly it doesn't seem to bother you. " I wouldn't say, according to CPT, the role of Se is a small package battery. I don't think that's the case at all. " - I never said that and I don't think that it is the case either. I said that natural energy levels varies from an individual to another and this whole conservative image about how INTJs deal with their energy is a fallacy. The image we have about things conditions our classifications and it is the case, that's the real issue. "Most INTJs are sensitive to their environment, being highly attuned to the details while categorizing those details." - While we agree on what you are saying (which allegedly what has been popularised among this channel), we have a major issue, this term " sensitivity " isn't defined. It is a general statement that has been thrown without being specified. "And overall, most people who are sensitive to their environment will be very attentive to their energy level to avoid feeling drained. Especially It might stem from their preference for efficiency and focus for the INTJs, so being careless about their energy level is less likely when dealing with stress. " - The issue is that what you are saying is a " portrait ", not a portrait that describes reality as a whole. Again, you are talking here in terms of likeliness which dismisses the individual case study promoted by CPT. I beg to differ but we are not using technological tools in order to derive an imagery that asserts what you are saying, neither the owner of CPT does. It just seems as a " thus spoke zarathustra " thing and everyone followed the lead without questioning. You are using a barnum effect statement in order to again fit a specific image about the INTJ. Empirically, there is a wide range of sensitive people who are highly observant of their environnement and avoidant of energy draining all the while prioritising efficiency and that do not fit a single bit under the umbrella of INTJ type. That's the major issue. While CPT states that it is a cognitive model, it relies on behavioural cues in order to allegedly catch your cognition, therefore it requires an average portrait about the INTJ and here again comes the issue, are you capable of pinpointing INTJs that are out of that portrait ? That's the real question. You can be sensitive to the environnement, you can be avoidant of energy draining, you can priorititise efficiency while managing your energy in a resourceful manner, but can you entertain INTJs that has a high level of energy level that may seem to act carelessly as they seem quite robust compared to the average INTJ ? They both agree on efficiency due to Te being authority, but do they offer the same behavioural aspect when it comes to high levels of stress ? The answer is flatly no, because while the average INTJ has to be seemingly really careful, the above average INTJ can afford a stronger and durable reaction compared to the average INTJ. It is like comparing an average athlete to someone who isn't an athlete, while they can both be INTJs, the average athlete can afford something the commoner cannot do, all the while they are both managing their energy efficiently, but they are not managing the same energy level, the average athlete can feel secure in his energy level and capable doing more things therefore reducing considerably the weight of the stereotypical portrait. " (PSI Theory) is innately more active, and since they value Te, they'll probably be in a goal-oriented mode to deal with that stress Everyone is different, though. Why +SeTe? How can we be certain this willlikely happen? I am curious." -Exactly, that's exactly what we are looking for. For now, what he is saying are mere hypothesis about cognitive profiles that are thrown to us with the old mbti spirit of stereotypical behavioural cues. There is nothing cognitive here. To be honest, if I wanted to test someone's cognition, I would rather make him go through a series of tests that allows us to depict how he is processing thoughts. I wouldn't settle for generalistic behavioural cues that do not encapsulate reality as a whole. "Your concerns are reasonable. It would be helpful if he supported his claims with empirical evidence and more examples. However, I do want to point out that your critique seems to prioritize rhetorical flourishes over clarity, and maybe it would be a lot harder for Harry to read your comment. Especially the assumptions and ad hominem overtones (e.g. religion part). Overall, reasonable concerns " . - Don't worry about that. I made it quite clear what I meant about the religion part, unless he acts as he usually acts. Besides from how he defined the cognitive layout, he is still using the same old mbti approach in order to give life to the cognitive layout he deemed to be existing : " setting a model to study people and then make people fall under the model and transform statistical observations into absolute facts " and that is the limitation of these models, they perceive what they want to perceive in the individual.
I have missed your wonderful explanations on the INTJ inner world, Harry. Thank you so much for this!
The master of MBTI is back!
Love going over the in's and out's of these things! I often find it interesting the surprising connections I can sometimes make with other people over some of these very functions. For example when organizing a social event, there is often I think a learned cooperation between Fe- and Te-, as Fe-doms will often recognize that people get along better when things are running smoothly behind the scenes, and a Te- user such as myself understands that people are more likely to allow things to run smoothly if they are all getting along with each other! I find it's surprising how often my help is requested for social events but I find that I can carry the arrangements while the Fe-doms carry everyone's enthusiasm and it makes for a good show, it's amazing how it all works out. Have had many an in-depth Te-Ne discussion with ESTJs as well! It never gets boring
Your the first channel that I’ve found that actually goes into depth into personality types 😭
Dark side Harry: "This is challenging material."
Good side Harry: "But you can do it! :)"
Dark side Harry: "But this is new material beyond your smooth brain."
Good side Harry: "I love working on this stuff :)"
Awesome! New video dropped. Thanks, Harry. I love the nuance of CPTand its depth compared to other systems.
Very interesting! I hope you'll do a hidden functions video for the ISFP as well. I'm currently trying to decide if I'm an ISFP or INTJ.
I really like the enthusiasm and the depth you went into this video!
Ayyyyyy first of the year!
I love this network theory you are elaborating. Looking forward to the even more distant "Tetritary" and "Inferior" versions hidden functions, and how they interact with the core type!
I also like you briefly explored the nuances of differences of IxxJ/ExxP perceptual dominant types in contrast with IxxP/ExxJ types. It's argued to even be a way to divide two kinds of people based on other typology systems that highlights this extensively.
Great video Harry, so informative as always; btw it's Emma from the patreon. I remember prior to being typed by you that I was fairly sure I was an INTJ. I can see why many ENFJs especially divergent more socially ambiverted or introverted subtypes might mistype as an INTJ. I certainly (although they're worthless) always type as an INTJ on MBTI tests which I can see why with having a proclivity towards thinking, introversion socially, abstract thought processes (TiNi) and being rather organised & not spontaneous throughout the course of my life. I've also noticed I have a highly active INTJ subnetwork: I guess I lean more into my introverted networks as a divergent ENFJ.
I really hope you can do a video on divergent subtypes: why they manifest and what keeps one within the confides of this subtype as this isn't really expounded upon on the wiki or in the ebook to my knowledge. Any plans to do this?
Thanks for your continued dedication Harry and a happy new year to you 😊
great vid 🔥hope this will become a new series 🤞
Thank you for your work on this. Clarity of this framework really helped my overly mechanistic brains to grasp how differently people can operate. I do enjoy classic/arcane/mystical Jungian models too but I feel they often are more useful for self-reflection in spiritual sense, bit like religion for trauma work. This model is much less clunky in evyryday use, great work!
Hey Harry! At last, network theory series. In an old video you’ve mentioned that INFJ, being in stress or under the pressure, might’ve become more socially strict and demand the order from people around. This is perfectly correlate with ESFJ being the auxiliary network for an INFJ. Also INFJ, being pretty covert type, might be pretty easy mistyped as an ESFJ. As an ESFJ could’ve been taken for the ISTJ (ESFJ’s auxiliary network) in a stress response.
@@courierquest5345 100%! Types can of course act in all sorts of ways when stressed but those that lean on their authority position are going to be more likely - FeNe in the case of the iNT and TeNe in the case of the iNF. I do notice the more we're pushed the more we tend to default to what is familiar, so the stress response will often be something that is sustainable e.g. a divergent subtype or leaning on a preferred auxiliary
@@CognitivePersonality So true. I might’ve also add that person leaning in his auxiliary type might became somewhat of a parody on this type. Like a divergent ENTJ spreading Ni-insights in both ISFP and INFJ manner to the point of complete obliviousness about his convergent thinking. It is also a little bit of a scary that person might never became consciously in touch with his convergent pairing.
I just knew that hidden functions are referring to networks! Looking forward to these series🤞
Yet another banger, Harry, thanks for seeing us.
Finally, you have discovered another aspect of advanced socionics. The INTJ, as formulated as an NiFi, is actually an ILI, and from there, you actually derived all of the 'process' types within socionics. 🤓
@@zhaoli4608 It is cool how Socionics also maps out network theory theory Results and Process! I think in that system it's more to differentiate between categories than suggest movement? Really awesome how the two systems keep lining up though
That's cause the two theories use the same structure to study two different sides of the mind. It's like using the same ruler to measure your arm and your leg. In both cases you're measuring a person's length in a sense and there are correlations but neither is able to capture the full complexity of the person.
@@CognitivePersonality I study socionics as well and your system is very close to it which is far more descriptive and accurate than mbti.
i love this video so much, i was compelled to comment (i never do haha) - looking forward to more! thank you so much
[~a probable INTP]
Gosh, just when I thought I was an ISTP, but then, maybe my TiNi is developed from an INTJ network 🤣 oh boy… back to the drawing board
ISTPs generally like to expertise in field they are interested in while as INTJ I would only want to know things enough for being efficient being Te authority .
INTJs could be exploring and learning things via NiFi by reconstructing the knowledge with their own thoughts and experience while ISTPs would be more likely to go by the book and rather learn things logically than emotionally like INTJs
I identified as an INTJ for so long to only come to the conclusion that I'm actually Autistic 😆
I feel this so much. There seems to be a lot of overlap here lol
At age 64 years my path may have been similar but perhaps with an opposite (for now) outcome. Despite it being suggested I have never been formally diagnosed as being 'autistic' (please excuse my unfamiliarity with current terminology) but job-related PF tests (military and civilian) dating back to my early twenties and a recent MBTI test indicate INTJ. This is where I'm most comfortable, I guess. Very best wishes.
Indeed so much overlap.. I find it funny and interesting that Vilians in comics and TV shows typed as INTJs also show Autistic traits..
I'm happy for you sir 😊 comfortable is a good place to be within yourself indeed🍀
i thought i was lightly autistic and didnt believe in mbti, now i am certain i am an INTJ and maybe only have a sprinkle of the tism.
It’d be pretty cool if you do more mbti analysis of movie or fictional characters, really liked those. ESPECIALLY do breaking bad, feel like that ones mandatory like Star Wars was
yay new video! will there be a serie of hidden functions?
@@昭杜-h8b Yes indeed!
Very interesting! While I suspect *how this might express itself, more specifically, will vary,* I wonder if the “hidden cognitive function pairs” are more-or-less the same for ENTPs since ENTPs are also N-F-T-S, just with flipped natured energy orientations?
Either way, this is so fascinating! I hope you enjoyed your holidays and more videos like this please!!!
@@debbieramos-galvan104 Exactly so! The difference in gateways makes it worth making a video for each type but ENTPs ISFJs ESFPs have the same networks in common. So this'll be a series
Thank you and likewise!
TiNi>FiSi>TeNe>FeSe in terms of relatability. I wonder if topography might become an intuitive individuation visualisation tool in illustrating very similar personalities. Specifically 'saddle points' which are used to describe the landscape of chemical transitions. Imagine rising to a 'bealach' which is the apex of a pass but also the lowest point which connects 2 peaks. Here, energy permitting you are in the best position to either retrace your steps, descend into another glen or rise to either peak in the shortest of orders. Perhaps differing neurotransmitters of choice might lower the saddle point altitude access route to say FeSe in one 'twin' and TeNe in another.
Harry has a bit of Obi Wan going on these days. Seriously, your insights and thoroughness are exceptional.
New cool video! In addition to your Star Wars series, would you type both Count Dooku and Mace Windu as an ISTJ? Waiting for the upcoming videos!
@@KarfaksTV Could see that for Dooki! Mace I lean more towards reserved ENFJ but am open
@@CognitivePersonalityChristopher Lee does play ISTJs well! (cf Saruman)
@@pazzy768 I think Christopher Lee was an ISTJ himself too
👌 Quality content
Oh well, another video about INTJs. I can't say I'm disappointed because it still strokes my ego to watch another video by you about my type, although I'd also watch a video about some underrated type such as ISFJ which I find to be more and more fascinating as there are some ISFJs that fit the vanilla, normal-type stereotypes. But with my recent research some then there are such ISFJs as Brian May, William Gibson who are incredibly deep thinkers and philosophers to the point they are constantly typed as INTJ, INFJ etc.. Just a food for thought. Maybe you'll touch that in future.
Nevertheless, a good and interesting video. I've always identified deeply with my Ti-Ni and I've always found connections between concepts, insights with ease to further my goals. Same with Te-Ne. I find that me and most INTJs I've seen switch between Te-Ne and Te-Se seamlessly, all the time when discussing for example. Fi-Si is truly liberating when mastered as emotional regulation is king. But I was surprised to say that you've never met disregulated INTJs. I've met some with, including one with clinical diagnosis of cluster-B PDs and those were the cases akin more to stereotypes - chimeric, choleric and just unpredictable. But true enough they were few.
And finally you say that Fe-Se is that hidden pathway. There is also truth with that. But I only use it with my closest ones. Maybe some day I'll come to a conclusion that using Fe in such an intense manner with people I do not know intimately is not betraying myself. But not today.
Thanks for another video
I see cpt new vid, I click
Second!
Hi Harry, sorry me again! I'm wandering as an ENFJ if you can help me decide what network I'm primarily leaning on as a stress response. Note, you typed me as a divergent ENFJ. I'm currently in a pretty depressive phase & I feel like I've moved out of FeSe convergence in fact I don't socialise with anybody including intimate relationships. I was wandering whether ISFJ might be worth considering but despite my SiTi flow states I seem to be focusing entirely on existential matters (more like existential doom lol). I'm trying to reconfigure myself to face the challenging I have ahead when going back to work. Apologies I know this is very vague but any help would be appreciated. I'm also finding it very difficult to do anything practical - I literally, for the most part, exist within the confides of my own mind. My thinking, when I'm well is usually highly verbal but now it's much more vague & emotion laden but almost in a stilted kind of way, as in it's not emotionally intense? Any ideas?
Can you please make a video explaining ti intravarted thinking please
Hey Harry! If due the typing service you type person as an INTJ and your second guess is an ENTJ - does this speak highly about the work person already made on his cognition? Since those types are far cry from each other in many ways. Kudos!
Hello Harry! Thank you for the video! I watched the video out of curiosity, being an entp. I'd like to ask you that in the same pattern would these function pairings be the hidden function for the entp? TE-NE/TI-NI/FE-SE/FI-SI
And lastly, would it be possible for you to do these types of videos for other types?
thank you, see you next month!
@@incireçine I'm planning on making this a full video series! Might change the presentation/title based on how this one is received. And yeah same for ENTP!
So excited for this!! Please keep them coming 🙏 Another vote here for ENTP next!
Hey Harry! Am I right that amongst Te+ types, besides ENFP the most consistent Ne-type is actually ENTJ, not an ESTJ? ENTJ’s Ne is prevalent, but subdued to the Ni (enriching it with new ideas and scenarios e.g.), as I guess. Kudos!
I think generally speaking it would depend on the gateway from which Ne is accessed. ENFPs and ESTJs would have Ne as a primary gateway and thus would be convergent Ne since they’re both extroverts. However the ESTJs would be hyper convergent owing to it being in agency position, making it more intense and egotistical than that of the ENFP.
For ESFPs and ENTJs, Ne is dipped into from Se or Ni, since it’s not a primary gateway function. An ENTJ dips into FeNe, and an ESFP dips into NeFe.
If the ENTJ dips into FeNe from a TeSe gateway, it will be FeNe+ since TeSe for an ENTJ is convergent (so will be more ESFJ like). But if an ENTJ dips into FeNe from FiNi, it will be FeNe- (and thus more INTP-like). It’ll be similar for the ESFP, where they can be more ENTP-like or ISFJ-like depending on whether they’re accessing NeFe+ or NeFe-.
Hope that helps :)
@@pazzy768 Hey man! Thanks for the reply. As I recall, authority function in CPT is more conscious than agency (which is still convergent). Because of this, authority function tend to reach its counterpart more constantly than agency. For example, ISFJ, via Fe, would reach Fi more constantly than Te via Ti (even though ISFJ’s Ti is more convergent).
So to speak, ENTJ and ENFP both intuitive compulsive type, while ESFP and ESTJ both sensing compulsive - it means both latter types have a more easy oscillation between Se-Si.
To prove my words, you can check out kid Anakin (ESTJ) typing: second type Harry assumed was an ESFP - due to how constant were Se-employment of Anakin in first film. Take care!
@@pazzy768this was a really succinct but thorough explanation thank you my friend 😊
That is actually a very good question! I also wonder between say, intuitive compulsive and sensing compulsive types (even though their convergence is different) how does that compulsivity play a factor in their overall behavior/impression that they give off etc (if it does). And is that the reason why some types are thought of as "intuitives" and others as "sensors" even though their actual dominant functions are the opposite (if you get what I mean). The comment above explained the dip functions very well.
@@phoenixxsoul Thanks for the comment! I would assume that the overall difference between Sensing/Intuitive compulsive types is in tendency to immediate desicions. Intuitive compulsion generally implies more laidback or playfull approach to the immediate reality, spending a little bit more time in your head. This tendency applies mainly to the default subtypes, because obviously convergent subtypes of ENxJs shows more tenacity. While convergent ESxPs or ESxJs be more playful and scatterbrained. This is my 5 cents, hope it make some sense. Kudos!
A couple questions:
first:
Don't INTJ's have FE Blindspot, which implicates, that they generally like to switch FE with TE and thus more gladly use Ne-Te as a lens dominant/lens oppositional dip?
second:
When looking at the "true" auxiliary processes, which functions then, take over the role of the two main functions, which make up the bedrock of identity for a given type.
For example when looking at the INTJ:
which function takes over the NI-FI convergent function and the SE-TE divergent one?
I mean out of these true auxiliaries there must be two functions, which are comparably used with a higher preference than the other two remaining functions, right or no?
third:
What about the "true" tertiaries and the true oppositionals? Are you then using the same method when determining them like you would with the determination of the true auxiliaries?
That is for the true tertiary switching again to lens dominant/lens oppositional mode with the following function-stacks:
SI-FI, NE-TE, SE-FE, NI-TI;
And for the true oppositionals:
codec dominant/codec oppositional mode, with:
FI-NI, TE-SE, FE-NE, TI-SI;
If I'm right about this, is the order of the function-states correct,
or do I swap the true tertiaries including its condition described above with the true oppositionals?
---
I hope the questions are somewhat intelligible...
Can you help me out with these?
Best regards from a crazy CPT nerd :^)
The Fe blind-spot does not mean an INTJ does not have vision (metaphor for Fe), it's more like the blind spot when driving, it's something you can concours with a shoulder check if you put conscious effort into learning it and internalizing it bit by bit..
@@heeropeero8919 So the Fe blind thing is more true *within the dominant network* than outside of it. This is because an Fe dominant auxiliary network is still passing through NiFi dominance first, and therefore won't have all of the socionervous stuff of an actual eFS
Yeah exactly accurate for the authority and oppositional networks!
@ thanks for your reply! ^^
Hey Harry! Sorry for an endless array of questions, your content is just too stimulative for some reason😅 Does what we casually call “money game”: increasing the income, constant grinding, getting a corporeal promotion - is more of a Ti-Fe domain, mostly common amongst Ti dom/auth?
I can imagine ISTP or ENTP keeping money as the constant objective value (without any malicious intent of course). In many ways, getting money helps to keeps things as they are, or change ‘em in a predictable way - which seems Ti-ish in CPT. Kudos!
Worth mentioning my fiancé is an ESFP with quite an ESTJ subnetwork going on & he's very money oriented. I think the rationale behind it though is not money for moneys sake but rather to enable him to lead a comfortable lifestyle so he has the full capacity to actualise himself in fitting with his Fi authority. He's all about promotions at work & 'the next goal'. I don't think money & the accumulation of wealth is particularly pertinent to any one type in particular but rather the reasons for doing this may be, in general, slightly different for each type. I'm a divergent ENFJ btw & I have to say as long as I have enough expendable income I'm really not that bothered like the lazy bum I am lol.
@@AnyaAnnika67 Heya! Thanks for the savvy reply 👋 My hunch is that “making money for the sake of money” (considering this as a very specific sort of motivation) is an approach more natural for Ti-compulsive types. While both ENFJ and ESFP are F-compulsive.
Still, I can perfectly see both latter types generating enough wealth for themselves, not a matter of a type. Take care 💪
If somebody has a Thinking-Feeling in the middle range 55%-45% how would you typify them? INTJ/INFJ? But they are so different all in all!
Irrelevant tests have letters on a continuum. J/P swaps all 4 functions, and T/F as well as S/N swaps 2, so one cannot take any of those tests and get a reliable answer.
I type as INTP on every one of those tests but i'm a likely ENTP. I'm a lucky one.
INTJs are more similar to ISFP than INFJ or INTP in any useful system. That shows why it doesn't work
I wouldn't rely on tests. I've been typed by CPT as a divergent ENFJ yet on tests I consistently type as INTJ with a high thinking score - it's hardly surprising as the ENFJ is a TiNi divergent type. I'd highly recommend Harry's services to figure out your most likely type.
Hey Harry! Would you consider Lex Fridman as an INTJ? Among other things, he has a very relaxed (even near robotic) nervous reactions. Kudos!
@@courierquest5345 Nah ESFP - definitely bit of NiFi+ though
@@CognitivePersonality Very interesting take, because he has this booksmart-STEM-tenure-academia archetype, not fitting the stereotypic view of what is Se-Te+. Not the first person you would associate with the impulse behaviour. Although, people have noticed already, how stubborn he may be in pushing his agenda (causing massive annoyance in twitter/reddit e.g.). Cheers👋
@courierquest5345 Yeah Fi Auth or Se dominance (which are more traits than processes) don't necessarily mean impulsive. Plus I've met plenty of PhD ESFPs. Pretty misunderstood type
@@CognitivePersonality Not necessarily misunderstood, CPT just got its own definitions allowing to type person as an eST, the mutual with MBTI here is abbreviation foremost 👍
I’ve been typed as INTJ, ESTJ, ENTJ, depending on which site I use😅 question is - is there a point to get so exact about typing? Or just be versatile and lean in on whatever works in the situation! It’s like this quest for truth - but why? And who is holding the key to the truth? Maybe Harry is 😂 but do I need to find out for what point! Is the question
@@567ohyeah Honestly this is my favourite sort of comment because it points to the elephant in the room - people do have dispositions on the cognitive level but what one person means by INTJ could be ISFP to another person, and so on. All my videos are coherent within the cognitive framework I work with, but an INTJ will still be understood slightly differently in CPT (emphasising their existential regulation) to certain MBTI interpretations (emphasising their analytical depth and/or industriousness).
So there *is* a truth but it's always nested within the system you're working with. I try to get around this ambiguity of construct by opening up the type to dips and auxiliary networks - not just because they're consistent with reality but because it encourages people to see types as maps of cognition through which they can expand their minds and get a genuine *use* out of it beyond just feeling seen and validated.
You have the right mindset!
I love you too Harry 😂 You have the best content on this subject. Keep up the great work ❤ I confess I binge watch you. 🎉
@@CognitivePersonality I don't think there's any getting away from the fact that CPT is a superlative typology comparative to the likes of MBTI however. As you said Harry, MBTI very much favours a very static definition of the INTJ emphasising their analytical prowess and, whats more ascribing personality facets that bare very little relation to cognitive type and in many cases are damn right bogus (eg the Machiavellian INTJ). I like the direction CPT is going in with the ability to expand our cognitive gateways and the emphasis on the interrelations between types. Honestly I frequent many MBTI groups & for the vast majority of people there's too much of an emphasis on creating very distinct archetypes that contain an individual, prescribe what someone cannot do and very fractious relationships between people of another cognitive type. For this reason, I've parted ways with MBTI. Being an ENFJ, I don't relate to any of the ENFJ archetypes whatsoever in fact despite being typed by you I'm most often accused of being mistyped because I don't fit their narrow definition with the great irony being, the vast majority in the group are probably mistyped themselves. It's a shame for many people that cognitive type has become so embroiled with their identity and used as an excuse as to why they can or cannot do something. Even worse are the stereotypes projected against other people. On the macro level there's more similarities between people than there are differences - it's on the micro level however that it gets really interesting. Also Harry, someone mentioned on the patreon that FeSe+ is effectively consecrated TiSi+, can you explain that to me please?
Hello. Could you explain how to read the network that you posted at the end? For example what do the arrows mean?
@@The.Zen.Diogenes Sure! See how in the diagram NiFi dips into SiTi and NeFe? It's the same on the network level. See iNF cognition as being surrounded by a ring, much like Saturn. This ring contains auxiliary processes that can also dip into each other.
So the type can access TeNe TiNi FiSi FeSe, processes that are on the same plane of movement so can also dip into each other. The arrows represent fluidity.
The only thing wrong about the diagram is that auxiliary dipping is not one-directional. Technically FeSe can go into FiSi and vice versa.
Hope that makes sense!
Beautiful. Thanks for this fantastic lecture. Do you think it is best for all these functions in the auxiliary networks to be used in near-balance? Or can you be focused on tene + fisi & the dominant network more so than tini & fese, whilst having just enough focus on them to keep our cognition harmonious. Thus you’d have more cognitive energy / reservoir for working on the tertiary/inferior networks as supports for the dom & aux network?
@@haniyehsheibani I think it's definitely safe to lean more on one auxiliary process for an extended period of time so long as you keep checking in with the others. E.g. I have a current eTS auxiliary but still check in with iTS iFN and eFN
@ thanks again Harry! Would be less enlightened without you!
How synchronous.. I was doing something similar drawing figures of each type with dominant, reverse and shadow and how these can develop.. then I meditated on how the dominant function colours everything (critical parent, 4th spot Se-(NSi) lending itself to internal martial arts), rememembered how I unsubscribed here because of something i disagreed with buut my new thoughts had similarities so I re-subscribed.. and there comes similar but different take on INTJ zen-mastery just in time 😂
We can indeed do everything and transcend
Still is my concious just Ni using the the others I wonder.. am I accessing Fi and Se right now as distinct ego processes or Ni playing with toys.. hmm
@@godKiller.369 haha I love that! Welcome back
I am a convergent INTP with a strong ISFP side and strong ISTJ/INFJ auxiliaries. So strong that for a while I was confused about my primary and auxiliary network. I have a question about the correlation of CPT and Enneagram. Would you say that a CPT type could be any enneagrm type or not? Or maybe the two personality theories are not compatible at all?
@@xripkan6623 My suspicion is that a CPT type can be mapped onto a sort of *enneagram spectrum*, but having a kind of nature-level enneagram doesn't mean they won't have an additional nurture-level enneagram from their upbringing
@@CognitivePersonality So some kind of "cognitive" or "innate" enneagram type and a "cultural" enneagram type
Do CPT types align more with MBTI stereotypes or socionics? Or neither
I find socionics are far more accurate at describing certain types and these types allign more with CPT than mbti
@@billyboyp4u Neither tbh, it's generally an anti-stereotype system but stereotypes can be explained by multi-type combinations
I know this is a lot off-topic but he is my ranking of all the types most overrated to most underrated let me know if you agree
Very overrated INFJ INTJ ENTP
Overrated ENTJ ENFP INTP INFP ENFJ
Underrated ISTP ISFP ESTP
Very underrated ESTJ ESFP ISTJ ISFJ ESFJ
According to my observations, i do not really agree with you about over simplifying the impact of stress (4:52).
Where I agree with you that the "grip" thing is rather a simplistic idea, I do not really agree about your overgeneralised statement saying " INTJs are generally conservative of their enegy, therefore this " in case of stress. There are life situations imposing on the individual to act out of their usual comfort zone. While it can be true about some INTJs to remain conservative of their energy in cases of stress, that's only relative to the situation they are facing, I hardly imagine someone falling under the category of an INTJ who would go like : " meh i keep my energy " in front of a pressuring situation that requires a strong response, where you either give it all or simply get crushed. You are not specifying the degree of stress either. All in all, you seem to dismiss an important factor about the human brain, its primary role is to sustain your survival in a given environnement by setting the required behaviour, which of course contradicts your attempt on setting a model that takes into account one of your commercial logos : " fluidity ".
You seem rather rigid in your perspective which makes me also wonder if you are not making an Islamic case out of a judeo-christian paradigm i.e. trying to use the same biblical stories in order to erect a supposedly new religion. While indeed we have a new religion, you don't seem to drop the spirit of old MBTI stereotypes either.
Which lead us to another important aspect, this whole battery like energy doesn't seem to apply to all the population of INTJs. Where all INTJs agree on the fact that they are conservative of their energy due to the role of Se according to CPT, this doesn't tell much about how much volts each INTJ possesses . According to how much voltage an INTJ has, an INTJ can afford what another INTJ cannot afford and that is what can surely be a source of mistyping if we settle for such loose statements as yours. Maybe the INTJs that you have met up until now helped you form a generalistic overview of how an INTJ should show up, this can be quite contradicting to your declaration where CPT is a model that is interested in the individual as a unique case rather than making him fall under a statistical observation.
From your videos, you seem to say the topic you are dealing with is "complex" (which is becoming redundant after many years) when it allows you to run away from giving the full explanation of your ideas, but you seem to dismiss the complexity of human cognition when it fits your agenda. This makes me question whether you backed up your statements with scientific evidence or not. It also makes me wonder if the topic you are dealing with is only complex to you. I would rather surmise this as a failure to communicate your ideas to a public that isn't well versed into typology as a whole.
Where I kind of sense in you some eagerness to criticise ideas that do not fit your taste, such as the grip thing (which is, again, obviously a shallow idea and that can be an excuse for you so to not consider the individual as a unique case of a given type), it doesn't seem that you are having the same proclivity towards pondering whether your statements are not kind of simplistic and insufficient to describe reality as it is.
I agree that each INTJ's energy level may vary when it comes to stress, so I understand the statement "INTJs are generally conservative of their energy" may or may not apply to most INTJs. Similarly, someone with a low sense of competence will most likely avoid any potential failure that may lower their confidence. That type of psychological need is vital for our survival, and a low level of competence (or other needs) will lead to avoidance to conserve that level.
I wouldn't say, according to CPT, the role of Se is a small package battery. I don't think that's the case at all. Most INTJs are sensitive to their environment, being highly attuned to the details while categorizing those details. And overall, most people who are sensitive to their environment will be very attentive to their energy level to avoid feeling drained. Especially It might stem from their preference for efficiency and focus for the INTJs, so being careless about their energy level is less likely when dealing with stress.
So, I see the logic behind that generalized statement, but how can we be certain INTJs will rotate their axis when they feel highly stressed? I imagine their object recognition (PSI Theory) is innately more active, and since they value Te, they'll probably be in a goal-oriented mode to deal with that stress. Everyone is different, though. Why +SeTe? How can we be certain this will likely happen? I am curious.
Your concerns are reasonable. It would be helpful if he supported his claims with empirical evidence and more examples. However, I do want to point out that your critique seems to prioritize rhetorical flourishes over clarity, and maybe it would be a lot harder for Harry to read your comment. Especially the assumptions and ad hominem overtones (e.g. religion part). Overall, reasonable concerns
@@AxelPresniyakov Excellent critique! CPT is a situational system so if anything I say comes across as "INTJs are energy conservative and therefore hold on to their energy in each and every situation" this is a failure to represent my ideas. Empirical research I have myself conducted indicates how situational personality is.
But this is why CPT is a fluid model that has uncertainty built into it. If we are talking about types we are talking about a categorical construct across what is in reality a spectrum of individual variation.
All statements are insufficient descriptions of reality. I use terms just as 'generally' for this reason. A system is stronger when it can adapt to reality rather than prescribe what it should be. I think it's far safer to dismiss something like grips as highly unusual than to arbitrarily prescribe something that a naturally energy conservative type - by it's very definition - is somehow bound to do when it gets stressed.
You're right though - CPT at the core is all about individual variation and I should be more cautious in future speaking in absolutes as this betrays the essence of the system
@@AxelPresniyakov I would add many would take issue with your religious analogies here which certainly don't do your argument many favours.
Keep in mind indulging in sensory overload and going on binges isn't a great example of the human brain adapting to its environment. I don't think I ever made out in the video INTJs being unable to draw upon reserves of energy nor go into other type modalities more befitting the situation.
I feel contradictions have been drawn here where there are none. As I mentioned I will certainly be even more cautious in making general statements about unique instances, but on a second read I couldn't help but notice the straw man
@@CognitivePersonality
We both agree that the aim of CPT is great but your way of presenting things fails to represent the system.
While you never seemed to be bothered by the language you are using in order to depict reality, you seemed quite confident at transforming statistical observations into generalistic statements.
You set a cognitive layout, but to give life to the respective layouts associated to each type, you still use generalistic statements based on your observations.
I never stated that a type cannot go to other types modalities in order to adapt, that's actually what I was defending about your system since it is your marketing logo and that the cognitive layout you defined allows to take into account. I would rather suggest you to focus on cognitive processes and back up your statements with scientific evidence more and more rather than count on behavioural cues that cannot be generalised to all individuals of a given type. The definition of your types are tied up to what you personally see, not tied up to an intrinsic definition related to your definition of the cognitive layout, which is quite questionable for a cognitive approach. In fact, the way you defined your cognitive layout is supposed to study the individual, not state absolutes.
Again, I told you that the grip idea is simplistic. What I actually said is that your way of explaining your point of view dismisses the situation to which a type can be facing. You are attacking the grip idea which is quite a shallow attempt and that has no real utility. Let's say it in another way : " you are making it look that you dismiss the idea of grip that is a source of mistyping all the while you are asserting that the INTJ acts in a specific manner in response to stress". Concretely, you are not defining what kind of stress and you seem to neglect the fact that not all people are living a life that can be conceived by your statements.
You attack uselessly the idea of grip (which is already a simplistic idea without any doubt) in order to say that is a source of mistyping all the while your undefined statement is a real source of mistyping. Do you understand it or not ?
Let me frame it again for you : you are making it look that you are making a valid case by dismissing other ideas which have already been classified as irrelevant in order to explain certain phenomenon so to make your case which is inherently empty and cannot be supported by the way you defined the cognitive layout of CPT.
You do not seem to be aware of your own contradictions. Clearly you don't seem bothered.
Jumping on my religious analogy explains how much you do not seem to take time reading people's comments. The religious analogy bothered but you didn't seem to be bothered about the fact that you are portraying CPT as an individual case system in order to differentiate yourself from MBTI practitioners, you though use the same old stroke.
Again, I never said that going on binges is a sign of good adaptation, I said that what you consider as binges is rather vague and ambiguous, which again, we are very used to with your channel.
Though, you don't seem to weigh how extreme situations can impact people. I doubt very strongly that you have ever lived warfare or at least lived in regions of the world where war is still raging with devastating conflicts.
That's for the most extreme.
Less extreme, we can speak of abusive households.
Again, what do you define as binges ? No one really knows.
So please, indulge us with your scientific evidence or at least explain to us why you ignored the impact of the limbic system in all parts of the brain?
If we are studying a brain that is constantly creating networks, why do you define things in such a radicalistic manner ?
It is either your types live in a platonic world or you simply fail to present your case correctly.
All in all, you are making a strawman out of my statements which is quite honorable of you, you didn't disappoint me on this one. I am proud of you.
@Honey-Bunches-of-Oots
I agree that each INTJ's energy level may
vary when it comes to stress, so I
understand the statement "INTJs are
generally conservative of their energy" may
or may not apply to most INTJs. Similarly,
someone with a low sense of competence
will most likely avoid any potential failure
that may lower their confidence. That type
of psychological need is vital for our
survival, and a low level of competence (or
other needs) will lead to avoidance to
conserve that level."
You seem to dismiss other details that I emphasised. While it is true that I mentioned the variation of energy levels according to stress, you seem to dismiss the " individual case " where I said that not all INTJs have the same natural energy level regardless of stress. Why did you miss it ? I don't know. Based on a natural energy level related to each individual and depending on the degree of stress, you can expect different levels of reactions that will not fit in the eye of the observer who has a rigid perspective of how INTJs is very likely to appear, THAT is a real source of mistyping. Appearantly it doesn't seem to bother you.
" I wouldn't say, according to CPT, the role of
Se is a small package battery. I don't think
that's the case at all. "
- I never said that and I don't think that it is the case either. I said that natural energy levels varies from an individual to another and this whole conservative image about how INTJs deal with their energy is a fallacy. The image we have about things conditions our classifications and it is the case, that's the real issue.
"Most INTJs are sensitive to their environment, being highly
attuned to the details while categorizing
those details."
- While we agree on what you are saying (which allegedly what has been popularised among this channel), we have a major issue, this term " sensitivity " isn't defined. It is a general statement that has been thrown without being specified.
"And overall, most people who
are sensitive to their environment will be
very attentive to their energy level to avoid
feeling drained. Especially It might stem
from their preference for efficiency and
focus for the INTJs, so being careless about
their energy level is less likely when dealing
with stress. "
- The issue is that what you are saying is a " portrait ", not a portrait that describes reality as a whole. Again, you are talking here in terms of likeliness which dismisses the individual case study promoted by CPT. I beg to differ but we are not using technological tools in order to derive an imagery that asserts what you are saying, neither the owner of CPT does. It just seems as a " thus spoke zarathustra " thing and everyone followed the lead without questioning. You are using a barnum effect statement in order to again fit a specific image about the INTJ. Empirically, there is a wide range of sensitive people who are highly observant of their environnement and avoidant of energy draining all the while prioritising efficiency and that do not fit a single bit under the umbrella of INTJ type. That's the major issue. While CPT states that it is a cognitive model, it relies on behavioural cues in order to allegedly catch your cognition, therefore it requires an average portrait about the INTJ and here again comes the issue, are you capable of pinpointing INTJs that are out of that portrait ? That's the real question.
You can be sensitive to the environnement, you can be avoidant of energy draining, you can priorititise efficiency while managing your energy in a resourceful manner, but can you entertain INTJs that has a high level of energy level that may seem to act carelessly as they seem quite robust compared to the average INTJ ?
They both agree on efficiency due to Te being authority, but do they offer the same behavioural aspect when it comes to high levels of stress ? The answer is flatly no, because while the average INTJ has to be seemingly really careful, the above average INTJ can afford a stronger and durable reaction compared to the average INTJ.
It is like comparing an average athlete to someone who isn't an athlete, while they can both be INTJs, the average athlete can afford something the commoner cannot do, all the while they are both managing their energy efficiently, but they are not managing the same energy level, the average athlete can feel secure in his energy level and capable doing more things therefore reducing considerably the weight of the stereotypical portrait.
" (PSI Theory) is innately more active, and
since they value Te, they'll probably be in a
goal-oriented mode to deal with that stress
Everyone is different, though. Why +SeTe?
How can we be certain this willlikely
happen? I am curious."
-Exactly, that's exactly what we are looking for. For now, what he is saying are mere hypothesis about cognitive profiles that are thrown to us with the old mbti spirit of stereotypical behavioural cues. There is nothing cognitive here. To be honest, if I wanted to test someone's cognition, I would rather make him go through a series of tests that allows us to depict how he is processing thoughts. I wouldn't settle for generalistic behavioural cues that do not encapsulate reality as a whole.
"Your concerns are reasonable. It would be
helpful if he supported his claims with
empirical evidence and more examples.
However, I do want to point out that your
critique seems to prioritize rhetorical
flourishes over clarity, and maybe it would
be a lot harder for Harry to read your
comment. Especially the assumptions and
ad hominem overtones (e.g. religion part).
Overall, reasonable concerns " .
- Don't worry about that. I made it quite clear what I meant about the religion part, unless he acts as he usually acts.
Besides from how he defined the cognitive layout, he is still using the same old mbti approach in order to give life to the cognitive layout he deemed to be existing : " setting a model to study people and then make people fall under the model and transform statistical observations into absolute facts " and that is the limitation of these models, they perceive what they want to perceive in the individual.
That's me. INTJ, 5w6-so/sx/sp-582, ILI-D, LVEF 1114, RCOEI.