Cognitive Axes As Tight Feedback Loops
Exploring the oppositional symmetries within the Jungian functional stack
I want to preface this post by saying it’s not grounded or battle-tested in the marketplace of ideas. For the psychological hypotheses presented to take root, they must eventually be planted in some “real-world arena” that tracks results. The purpose of the post is to provide a scaffolding that can be used for empirical testing in such an arena.
Examining systems through frames and flows
The best way to examine a system is to identify the boundaries that enclose it and study the parts that move inside of those boundaries. For example, the circulatory system of an animal is entirely enclosed within its body, and its moving parts include blood cells, veins, arteries, and the heart.
Most systems are fractal, which means that the system itself is a moving part of a larger system with larger boundaries; similarly, the system contains moving parts that are themselves systems with their own smaller boundaries.
I will refer to the boundaries that enclose a system as “frames” and the moving parts of that system as “flows.” The latter term signifies that we’re not just considering the individual parts as inert objects but as parts that can morph and interact with each other within the frame. This is because most systems are not static. They are alive. Moreover, this implies that a system can be discussed either by the frames that encapsulate it, or the flows that run through it, or both.
With that in mind, I want to explore the system of Jungian personality archetypes with the frame of their functional stacks and the flows that emerge from the cognitive feedback loops between these functions.
The Jungian functional stack configuration
Elaine Schallock has worked to classify the eight Jungian functions as autonomous, shared, convergent, or divergent. She further describes how these functions form opposing pairs within a person’s ego (i.e., their most public-facing persona).
The autonomous functions (introverted feeling and thinking) tend to establish a sense of personal identity. The shared functions (extraverted feeling and thinking) tend to establish rapport with others. Thus, these cognitive forces create a push-and-pull dynamic between oneself and one’s tribe.
The convergent functions (introverted intuition and sensing) tend to form narrow interpretations and seek to conserve them. The divergent functions (extraverted intuition and sensing) tend to search for many potentials and follow all of the resulting possibilities. Thus, these cognitive forces create a push-and-pull dynamic between exploration and defense.
Each archetype contains one of each function in its stack, which means it contains two opposing pairs. In my archetype, the four functions are extraverted feeling (Fe/shared), introverted intuition (Ni/convergent), extraverted sensing (Se/divergent), and introverted thinking (Ti/autonomous). As shown in the placard below, my autonomous-shared pair lands positionally on the outside, i.e., 1st and 4th, and my convergent-divergent pair lands in the middle, i.e., 2nd and 3rd.
These same four functions also form my subconscious persona but in a different order. That is to say, my subconscious persona contains the equivalent configuration of opposing pairs but in a different order.
This impacts the flavor and texture of the conversation between opposing functions. However, I will save these particular textures and flavors for later posts. For now, I’ll focus on the generic form of these feedback loops and the different qualities they take on.
Feedback loops between opposing functions
I’m choosing to examine each flow in order of how intimately I can recognize them within my own experience. That is to say, I have strong access to the Ni/Se and Fe/Ti cycles and weaker access to the Ne/Si and Fi/Te cycles.
I. Introverted Intuition & Extraverted Sensing (Ni/Se) Loop
At its most functional, the “Ni/Se” feedback loop is sensitive to what is occurring in its physical ecology, and from this awareness produces a focused or meaningful vision that can be overlayed onto it.
Cooking properly requires attunement to physical variabilities that manifest in preparation methods (baking, sautéing, grilling, steaming), flavorings (salt, spice, sweet, savory), and textures (crunchy, smooth, full, energetic) – among other things. A good cook wraps these sensations together and directs them toward fulfilling a complex dish.
When there is sufficient breathing room in the loop, “Se” can digest environmental input at leisure and feed it to “Ni.” In the same way, “Ni” can produce abstractions at leisure on different levels of physics to generate visions for “Se.”
Given that “Ni/Se” is a perception loop, not a judgment loop, the phrase “breathing room” indicates that cognitive resources are used to inhale certain types of context and content.
When this breathing room is removed, The “Ni/Se” loop enters into an addictive form that I call the Meaning-Making Madness Machine. This machine is most often revved up when “Se” senses threats that are too overwhelming to process smoothly. In response, “Ni” frantically generates insights that might help escape the threat. The more these insights fail to restore safety, the tighter the loop gets. The tighter the loop gets, the more the senses fire haphazardly (e.g., the body shakes uncontrollably, the throat closes, or tears pour out).
Consider an example of how this loop could enter into a crisis: a worker operating machinery that creates too much noise and chaos to keep under discipline.
At some point, the loop may locked into place. Two options to restore breathing room are to (1) remove oneself from the physical threat or (2) forcefully interrupt the part of intellect that generates meaning. The latter tactic tends to be more effective but more difficult to execute.
Extraverted Feeling & Introverted Thinking (Fe/Ti) Loop
At its most functional, the “Fe/Ti” feedback loop is sensitive to subtle interpersonal dynamics and vibrational energies within groups, and from this awareness produces logically coherent courses of action that win effective results, usually in service of cultivating amity.
Teachers attune to different scales of social kinetics in their classroom; this includes differences in personalities, to whom and what attention is being given, how and when emotions rise and fall during the day, areas in which their students are struggling, pain points in any interactions, and the presence of leadership – as among other things. The good teacher applies this discernment to construct lesson plans fitting that particular group’s idiosyncrasies and redirect these plans in the moment to adapt to the group’s changing energy.
When there is sufficient breathing room in the loop, “Fe” can digest relational input at leisure and feed it to “Ti.” “Ti” can produce logical coherence at leisure on different levels of relationships to generate well-grounded reasoning about “Fe.”
There are two common ways in which this feedback loop can become badly tilted. As “Fe/Ti” is a judgment loop, not a perception loop, the lack of breathing room implies exhaling badly – the lopsided application of cognitive resources.
The first failure is when “Fe” dominates over “Ti”. In this case, the archetype deprioritizes rational justifications to maintain interpersonal harmony. By shoving the capacity for reasoning under the rug, the archetype hopes to bypass any disagreements that would introduce hostile energy and disrupt camaraderie.
The second failure is when “Ti” dominates over “Fe”. In this case, the archetype is unwilling or unable to deal with the fluidity needed to navigate relationships. The archetype demands that interactions be subject to legible rules and procedures that can be proven correct to reduce the overwhelming ambiguity in social circumstances.
Sometimes these two dysfunctional patterns will rev each other up. Consider a scenario where two spouses are having a conversation: one begins language games to smooth over escalating tension – an attempt at play – and the other interprets that as intentional misdirection.
Extraverted Intuition & Introverted Sensing (Ne/Si) Loop
At its most functional, the “Ne/Si” feedback loop is sensitive to what is occurring in its conceptual ecology, and from this awareness draws up a complex architecture of tactile memory that can be overlayed onto it.
High-quality media analysis requires attunement to complex conceptual fields in the form of tropes (rhetorical devices), story archetypes (patterns of events), character archetypes (patterns of behavior), and imagery (visual affect) – whether in a piece of writing, a painting, a song, or a movie. A skilled art critic possesses a finely tuned sensibility for how these fields coalesce into a recognizable narrative.
When there is sufficient breathing room, “Ne” can digest representational input at leisure and feed it to “Si.” Similarly, “Si” can produce corporeal impressions on these representations at leisure to store in memory and retrieve at will for “Ne.” When this breathing room is removed, The “Ne/Si” loop enters into an addictive loop that can be called the Prediction And Pleasure-Seeking Program.
I’m not an expert at how this loop enters crisis mode, but I’ve observed that it is often triggered when “Si” accumulates physical discomfort past the threshold it’s been trained to handle. In response, “Ne” frantically attempts to pull out ideas that might help escape from the threat. The more these ideas fail to point toward a familiar strategy to restore comfort, the tighter the loop gets. The tighter the loop gets, the more incentive there is to engage in unhealthy behaviors that boost temporary pleasure (e.g., eating a whole chocolate cake to numb agitation).
At some point, the loop may locked into place. Two options to restore breathing room are to (1) immediately engage in a known source of deep relaxation or (2) forcefully interrupt the part of the intellect that generates possibilities. There may be other more effective options.
Introverted Feeling & Extraverted Thinking (Fi/Te) Loop
At its most functional, this feedback loop is sensitive to cold informational input across a variety of data-oriented structures, and from this awareness produces an intricately ordered set of aspirational tastes and preferences that it promotes robustly.
Salespeople and marketers must quickly and accurately absorb facts in unfamiliar situations including a grasp of their client’s problems, a technical overview of the items they sell, where new people and products fit into established market segments, the most efficient tactics for closing – and much more. A good salesperson or marketer, with this assembly of computations, creates a spectacle that dazzles the public and usually nets a generous profit.
When there is sufficient breathing room in the loop, “Te” can digest pragmatic input at leisure and feed it to “Fi.” “Fi” gathers these dispassionate calculations across a wide field to generate heartfelt subjective revelations to layer onto “Te.”
The archetypes who manifest this loop wisely often appear to the world as sages, prophets, and mystics guiding humanity into a golden age. However, given that life is messy, this archetype can equally make a mess of “Fi/Te.”
The first failure is when “Fi” dominates over “Te.” In this case, the archetype will manipulate or hide information that doesn’t support its judgment of what is beautiful and inspiring. Believing itself to possess incomparable genius, it fiercely pushes utopia to the detriment of maintaining factual legitimacy and credibility.
A typical example of this failure is a charismatic preacher or guru ignoring evidence that disputes their moral pronouncements.
The second failure is when “Te” dominates over “Fi.” In its quest to maintain objectivity or a neutral stance, the archetype refuses to act as a proper authority in adjudicating a deep conflict in values. Instead, the archetype wishes to engineer a technique that can empirically validate all perspectives and sidestep the need to prioritize any single viewpoint.
One example of this failure is a software engineer who refuses to take ownership of design decisions that have moral impacts, believing instead that all differences can be resolved with a perfect, neutral algorithm.
Closing Observations
To close this post out, consider how these four cycles – whether functional or failing – have different flavors based on whether they are perception or judgment loops.
The feedback loops of perception involve one convergent function (Ni, Si) and one divergent function (Ne, Se). Thus, these failures are marked by improper calibration between the desire to explore and the desire to defend. Imbalances occur when these drives don’t support each other and produce dissonance between internal and external interpretations.
The feedback loops of judgment involve one autonomous function (Ti, Fi) and one shared function (Te, Fe). Thus, these failures are marked by improper identification and assimilation. That is to say, integrity cannot be achieved between self and others leading to denial, manipulation, or evasion – depending on whether one imposes oneself onto others or yields oneself to their tribe.
There are more loops in the Jungian functional stack to consider, and each will have even different flavors than the ones already examined. For example, the feedback cycles consisting of only introverted functions (e.g., Ti/Ni) or non-opposing pairs (e.g. Fe/Ni) will have their own forms of balance and breakdown.