An In-Depth & Clear Guide to All 8 Cognitive Functions

An In-Depth & Clear Guide to All 8 Cognitive Functions A quick note - as usual, I want to stress that any particular person can use all 8 cognitive functions. MBTI/cognitive functions are about preferences. It is about how you prefer to make judgments and how you most naturally take in information. Because it is your preference, that is what will tend to be most noticeable about you when you interact with other people. It is based on those observations that we can type people we know well or characters we have watched. So when typing, you aren’t looking for a single instance of a particular cognitive function, but a \*consistent\* display of this cognitive function over time. First up are the perceiving functions. Perceiving functions are how you prefer to take in information and perceive the world. I once stumbled across an excellent apple example that illustrated the perceiving functions concisely and clearly, so I will be using it here as well. Se (extraverted sensing) Se is a perceiving function in which you take reality for what it is without adding any abstract meaning to it. It is a perception function where you use your 5 senses (e.g. sight, taste, touch, hear, smell) to sense the environment. Apple example: This apple is red, it’s shiny, it has a bunch of dots on it, it tastes good, and it smells good. When I bite into it, it makes this crunchy sound. Psychology concept: Se is most related to bottom-up processing. A video describing bottom-up processing vs. top-down processing can be found here: 1 and an article describing it can be found here: 2 It is important to note that Se is the ONLY perceiving function that can be considered as bottom-up processing. All other perceiving functions (i.e. Si, Ne, Ni) are a form of top-down processing. Misconceptions: Se does not mean you are good at fighting, good at sports, or a stylish person. It also does not mean that you have amazing reflexes, are wild, like to party, and are never clumsy. SOME high Se users (e.g. ESxPs and ISxPs) have or do these things, but not all of them do. The only requirement to be considered an Se user is that you prefer to take reality as it is without adding abstract meaning to it. What to look for when typing: A character/person who takes reality as it is without adding abstract meaning to it. A character who may outwardly state their appreciation for the fine details in life, (e.g. "I love how she ties her hair", "the way his suit moves when he walks is so alluring", "I like the way she eats," "the colors and details of that dress are gorgeous", "I love the smell of her perfume", etc). A character who may want to see a particular movement over and over again. Shayna Character examples: One of my favorite examples of Se is Lisa (ISFP) from Zankyou no Terror/Terror in Tokyo. Despite being a clumsy person with not the best reflexes and facing depression, Lisa knows how to take in her environment with her senses. She knows how to stop and just feel everything around her, and she is incredibly aware of her environment. She is the character that showed me how beautiful Se can be. Another great example of an Se user in the creative space is Tsubame Mizusaki (ESFP) from Eizouken. You can see how her Se motivates her to become an animator and capture the fine details of life here (and her Se observations allowed her to help her grandmother): 3. You can also see Tsubame speak about the Se details she's passionate about in her work as an animator here: 4. Another anime series dedicated to Se is Yuru Camp. Rin knows how to slow down and just enjoy the present moment without adding an abstract meaning to reality. The Pixar movie Soul (ESxP) (via the character 22) was about developing Se and the importance of it. The character 22 in Soul found a reason to enjoy life and go on living because they were able to find enjoyment in sensory experiences. Another character example that shows Se in conversation is Yamada (ISTP) from My Love Story with Yamada-kun at Lv999. When Yamada speaks with someone, he takes that person’s words at face value with no added abstract meaning (though part of this is also due to his Ti). With Yamada, what you say is what you mean and what he says, he means. Overall, with Se an apple is just an apple, a painting of a dot with a white background is just that. Bonus: Thinking about Tsubame from Eizouken, a lot of animators need to use Se to capture the fine details of movement. In anime there's a term called "Sakuga '' which refers to fine detail animation or working animation. Here are some Sakuga compilations to emphasize the fine Se details in reality that these animators had to pay attention to. The shots in a way force you to consider the Se perceptive because they are an appreciation of those details. Food Sakuga, Fabric Effects Sakuga, Hand-to-Hand Combat Sakuga, Running Sakuga Si (introverted sensing) Si is a perceiving function in which something (e.g. a physical stimulus like an apple) triggers your episodic memory. Stimulating one or more of your 5 senses can transport you back to a time you had a similar experience. When that episodic memory is unlocked, it can then be compared to the current present reality. This is why Si is a form of top-down processing (Note: see the Se description for a comparison of bottom-up vs top-down processing). The episodic memory unlocked is the “past subjective impression” phrase you hear a lot when learning about Si. High Si users (e.g. ISxJs and ESxJs) tend to approach situations and problems by comparing them with what they have experienced previously. In other words, when presented with something new, Si users prefer to look for the familiar. Apple example: This apple reminds me of the time I went apple picking with my dad. It reminds me of when I baked an apple pie with my grandma./ Oh, this apple looks a little different from all the apples I’ve had thus far. Something is off about it. Psychology concept: Si is heavily related to episodic memory. A video explaining episodic memory can be found here (longer) and here (shorter) → while this second video is not completely accurate regarding episodic memory (i.e it does not distinguish between episodic and semantic memory), it does give you a shorter and more concise idea of what an Si user experiences (and as an inferior Si user myself, I totally see how the concepts in this video relate to my inferior function). Here is an article on episodic memory as well. Misconceptions: Si does not mean you like to take notes, does not necessarily mean you follow rules and guidelines, does not necessarily mean you like traditions, does not mean you are a pushover, does not mean you are controlling, and does not necessarily mean you like to record things with a camera. While some of these stereotypes are tendencies of some Si users, it is not a requirement to be an Si user. The only requirement to be an Si user is that you tend to compare your past often to your present. What to look for when typing: Look for someone who often compares the past with the present. The “past” doesn’t have to be so long ago, it can even be the week prior or yesterday. Si can also be something as simple as “Usually (i.e. every time I’ve seen them in the past), this person walks with an upright, straight posture. Today, they are walking slightly slouched. I wonder if something is wrong?” When the character speaks, you are looking for an implied usually tied to past experiences and impressions (and this can unfortunately easily be mistaken for Ni so be sure to read that section as well). Additionally, you are looking for a character who may have a hard time seeing past first impressions. The character/person may also immediately and emotionally react upon having a physical item trigger their episodic memory. For example, they may suddenly cry or become sad seeing an item because it reminded them of someone they cared for deeply. *Note: It’s important to understand that simply reflecting about the past is not Si. To be considered an Si user, there should be a stimulus (something in the present reality) to trigger your episodic memory. Character examples: Shinako (ISFJ) from Yesterday wo Uttatte/Sing “Yesterday” For Me is unhealthy Si personified. Everything from a bowl to her childhood friend's arm triggers her episodic memory and reminds her of her past love. It makes it very difficult for her to move forward with her life. While her use of Si is unhealthy, it is extremely clear so I wanted to make sure I mentioned her as an example. Violet (ISxJ) from Violet Evergarden also uses Si extensively. In the first few episodes, she sees an item and it immediately reminds her of the Major’s eyes. Violet is also very used to her previous experiences as a child soldier, so it makes it difficult for her to stray from that role when she is in new environments. With these two characters, we can visually see their Si. Another Si-dom character is Nagisa (ISFJ) from Assassination Classroom. Nagisa continuously compares the present reality with his past impressions and when faced with a new situation, he takes his time to become familiar and build his impressions of his alien teacher. However, rather than predominantly visually like Violet and Shinako, Nagisa’s Si is much more apparent in his internal monologues. I’ll move onto intuitive perceiving functions next, but something I would like to briefly mentionwhile not required, one tendency of intuitive users is to ask a lot of questions when they are approaching a new concept or person. This is because the answers to those questions allow them to create and discover abstract patterns regarding said new concept or person. So be on the lookout for that when typing, but again it is not a requirement to be an intuitive user. In a nutshell though, intuitive users are looking to *relate* and *abstractly connect* information somehow. Ne (extroverted intuition) Ne is a perceiving function most related to divergent thinking. Ne users will see a physical stimulus and then try to abstractly relate that physical stimulus (or the concept of that stimulus) with something indirectly or only loosely/tangentially related. Ne answers the question, "What abstract connection can I make between the physical stimulus I am observing right now and something familiar I have seen in the past (Si)" (Note: Ne and Si are on the same axis, so all Ne users will also have some preference for Si and vice versa). High Ne users (ENxPs and INxPs) will find connections between seemingly unrelated things. They will say “Oh, X is kind of like G in a way!” The key difference between Ne and Si is that while Si focuses on triggering episodic memory and comparing it to the present, Ne focuses on relating a past concept with the concept of the physical stimulus observed in the present. So Si compares, while Ne branches out and connects. Apple example: Apple → fruit → fruit loops → Toucan Sam → Sam-I-Am → Eggs and Green Ham → Dr. Seuss = Oh, do you think Dr. Seuss liked apples? / Hey you know if I turned this apple over and used two popsicles sticks and some glue, I could make this look like a lady with a dress. / You know if there are atoms in apples and atoms in celery, do you think you can rearrange the atoms in celery to make an apple? Psychology concept: Here is a video on divergent vs. convergent thinking (note: Ni is basically convergent thinking) and here is an excellent video that focuses more exclusively on divergent thinking (highly recommend this if you want to better understand Ne). Here’s an article that also delves into divergent thinking. Misconceptions: Ne does not mean that you are always weird, random, whacky, or goofy. Ne does not mean you always act like a child, does not mean you are chaotic, does not mean you are always zoning out, does not mean you fail to take action, does not mean you cannot fight, does not necessarily mean you have poor reflexes, does not mean you are always happy or snarky, and does not necessarily mean you are always daydreaming (yeah I know it’s hard to believe, but if you go with this stereotype you’re going to end up mistyping a lot of characters). Furthermore, while Ne is related to ideation, having a lot of ideas does not necessarily make you an Ne-dom. What to look for when typing: A character who seems to rapidly jump from idea to idea (and again this doesn’t necessarily mean they are an Ne-dom, but most likely has Ne somewhere in their stack). A character who is able to relate seemingly unrelated things/concepts/scenarios. A character who makes a lot of analogies. A character who says something along the lines of “Hey, isn’t X kind of like G?” (Where X and G are things not directly related). A character who starts thinking about seemingly unrelated things after a physical stimulus triggers them to do so. A character who may make a lot of comparisons between seemingly unrelated things. A character who may use items outside of their intended use. Character examples: Erin (ENFP) from Kemono no Souja Erin/The Beast Player Erin is one of my favorite examples of a Ne-dom. While the anime does not go into Erin’s thought process as much, the manga does an exquisite job of showing how an Ne-dom perceives the world, how they try to create connections, and how they prefer to learn. In the manga, you can see how she asks many questions to help her better relate concepts together. Two other characters that represent how Ne is usually portrayed in anime are Miu (ENxP) from Ichigo Mashimaro and Marin (ENFP) from My Dress Up Darling. You can see this scene from where Miu uses Ne to relate inanimate objects with familiar concepts to create a comedy skit. For Marin, she is always relating reality with her favorite anime (Note: being a huge fan of anime and liking cosplay alone is NOT Ne, rather it’s about how reality stimulates her to start thinking about her favorite anime and relate it with other familiar concepts). Two other easily notable forms of Ne within her character are when a bird stole her hamburger and she called it a “ham-burgler" and when she was blowing on a locket to dry it and said that it was like blowing on some noodles before eating them. Ni (introverted intuition) Ni is a perceiving function most related to convergent thinking. Ni focuses on taking in multiple data points/physical stimuli in reality (Se) and finds one underlying pattern, concept, or answer that relates them all. These underlying patterns then become heuristics/rules of thumb that are then used to explain and predict the physical world. The underlying pattern can be a cause-and-effect relationship or just a single single concept that relates all the distinct stimuli. Ni tends to answer at least one of the following questions: "What is one underlying concept that connects the multiple things I am observing in reality (Se)?"/"What will happen once these physical stimuli are manipulated based on the underlying concept or relationship I have determined?"/"What abstract concept is this physical stimulus usually associated with?"- where the “usually” would give you one or few answers. Ni focuses on core, abstract heuristics that are widely applicable. In a nutshell, Ni is a function that converges multiple data points in real time and finds an underlying concept that relates them all. Apple example: The concept of an apple is usually associated with knowledge and sin. I see that the apple is on the teacher’s desk (data point/stimuli), I know there’s a test coming up next week (data point), there’s a sign on the wall that says bonus points are available on the test (data point/stimuli), I’m overhearing right now that teacher is known to like apples (data point/stimuli), Sarah the student kind of smells like apples (data point/stimuli) → Sarah most likely brought in the apple to win the teacher’s favor and get extra credit on the upcoming test (answer/underlying pattern). I’ll keep in mind from now on that people can try to provide gifts to win someone’s favor and get something in return from them (underlying pattern/heuristic). *Note: Without data points, Ni is useless. Ni is about converging data points real-time and relating them with one another via a single underlying pattern. Hence when Ni users are thrusted into a situation where they don’t have time to process and understand what the relevant data points are, they feel overwhelmed. They can’t come up with an answer, they feel flustered, and they can’t make their next move. This is how inferior Se presents in Ni-doms. *Note: You can also kind of conceptualize Ni and Ne as opposite sides of a mirror. While Ne starts at a single point and branches out, Ni takes those multiple branches and can find the starting point again. So if an Ni-user understands an Ne-user well-enough and asks a few questions, the Ni user may be able to understand what the starting point that set off Ne-user was by converging all the things the Ne-user has said. Psychology concept: This wikipedia page explains convergent thinking. Understanding convergent thinking can be difficult. An old test that I think really gets the idea of Ni across are Remote Associates Tests. You can find an example of one here and you can watch people try to solve the test here. As you can see, the test requires you to find one answer that relates all 3 words instantaneously. Imagine that the 3 words are data points out in the real world, and the answer is the underlying concept/conclusion the Ni user determines. While I personally think these tests are bad (and maybe I feel that way because I’m an Ne user), the point is that Ni works in a similar manner- in real time, Ni converges all of the external physical stimuli/data to create one underlying pattern/answer that relates them all. Once the answer/pattern is determined it then becomes a heuristic or rule of thumb to help predict and navigate reality. Two articles explaining heuristics can be found here and here .You can tell something is a heuristic because it usually comes after a qualifier like “usually”, ”generally”, “often”, “tends to”, etc. *Note (Ni vs Si): Both Ni and Si are used to create heuristics, which is why they are unfortunately often confused for one another. So you’re going to have to focus on other aspects of Ni and Si to be able to type the character/person accurately. With Si, you're looking for evidence of episodic memory being triggered and a focus on past subjective impressions used as data points to be compared with the present. With Ni, you’re looking for someone who converges information real time to either come up with a single solution or create an underlying pattern they then use to try to predict future events. Also, Ni focuses on creating abstract heuristics that are widely applicable. So while Si users might feel uncomfortable with new situations since they don’t have prior experience (and heuristics based on those past experiences to rely on), Ni users will generally (but not always) be better at adapting to new situations because their heuristics tend to be broader and more widely applicable and they are able to converge information fairly quickly once they are given time to observe and obtain data points in reality. So for Si, the data points are past subjective impressions. For Ni the data points are: physical stimuli in real-time, previous underlying patterns, facts, and other pieces of knowledge. Si creates heuristics to be compared against the present. Ni creates heuristics that can explain the present and be extrapolated to predict the future. Misconceptions: Ni is not having a plan or goal, Ni does not mean you are good at chess, Ni is not ambition and does not mean you want to control the world or start something grand, Ni does not make you edgy or mean, Ni does not make you an unkind person, Ni does not mean that you cannot make quick and efficient decisions, being an Ni user does not mean you cannot fight, being an Ni user does not mean that you dislike or cannot enjoy being in the physical environment (on the contrary a LOT of Ni users tend to like hiking for whatever reason), being an Ni user does not necessarily mean you have a terrible memory, being an Ni user does not mean that you never think about the past. What you're looking for when typing: A perceptive character who converges information from the physical environment real time to come to a single answer or underlying pattern. A character who tries to predict things based on the underlying patterns he/she/they have determined. A character who often mentions the general underlying patterns of people and things. A character who is able to guess the emotions of and predict the reactions of people very accurately and quickly based on physical stimuli (e.g. how the person looks, tone of voice, how the person responds to a question) and previously established underlying patterns. A character who isn’t as intimidated (even if they don’t prefer it) to be put in a new environment and can adapt rather quickly after they’ve had a bit of time to observe that new environment. A character who makes a lot of “guesses” or has a lot of “hunches” that turn out to be correct. Character examples: Zelan (INFJ) from the webcomic Freaking Romance and Nagyunn (INFJ) from the webcomic The Ember Knight are both amazing examples of Ni dominance because these characters have both been placed into new and unfamiliar situations. You can see just how quickly they converge information from the physical environment to come to a conclusion and/or create an underlying pattern and then use that pattern to predict how others will react and determine what their intentions are. Zelan and Nagyunn also use those predictions to plan out their next steps. Their Ni is extremely keen. Marinette from the cartoon Miraculous Ladybug (ENFJ) is also a great example of Ni because she visually uses Ni almost every time she calls for her Lucky Charm. She converges physical information (visually represented by the items/environment turning red and her coming up with a solution) in order to find the single best use of the charm. You can see examples of her using Ni after she calls for her Lucky Charm here (the first and third lucky charm clip). You can also see Hinata (ESFP) from Haikyuu visually using his inferior Ni (after working to develop it all season) to predict where the volleyball will go in the first 20 seconds of this clip so that he can receive it. Haruki (INTJ) from the anime movie Suizou wo Tabetai/I want to Eat Your Pancreas is another good example of how an Ni user tries to obtain information/data real time via questioning in order to create an abstract underlying pattern of a person (i.e. the truth-or-dare interview/interview scene). Haruki also mentions that he tries to predict how conversations with people will go inside his head despite never really trying before and lacking past experience to draw those conclusions from (i.e. a lack of Si). One of my favorite Ni-users, Dr. Frost from the webcomic Dr. Frost has a quote that is very reminiscent of how Ni needs data points to move forward: “It’s impossible to understand someone without asking them anything. A psychologist observes and asks questions precisely because they don’t know sir. Even the best psychologists in the world have to start with a question.” On another note, a Ni-dom character who makes a lot of WRONG guesses because they converged information and came to incorrect conclusions is Oshigiri Zakuro (INTJ) from Naka no Hito Genome (Jikkyouchuu)/The Ones Within. Zakuro is surrounded by insane people (and mostly Ne users) so it’s difficult for him to understand them and get a decent read on them. If you’re looking for an example of how Ni can lead to wrong conclusions then he’s the best character example of that. If you’re looking for a more grounded and realistic Ni character then I recommend the side character Saku Natsuwa (INTJ) from the manga Karu Hana wa Rin to Saku/The Fragrant Flower Blooms with Dignity. Alright, with the perceiving functions out of the way, I’ll next work on the judging functions. An important note is that judging functions do NOT perceive information, they just judge if a statement or idea is valid or invalid (Te/Ti) or morally (or ethically) good or bad (Fe/Fi). Extraverted judging functions (Te and Fe) in particular cannot exist without introverted perceiving functions (Si and Ni) because these judging functions require heuristics/rules of thumb to work, and introverted perceiving functions (again Si and Ni) are what create those heuristics (see the Ni section for more information about heuristics). This is why sometimes, Fe is often mistaken for being able to “read people'' and Te is mistaken for being “efficient,” when it really the more so the heuristics created by Ni or Si that allowed for those things to happen (so those traits are really more dependent on how high those perceiving functions are in your stack, though Ti and Fi can help with those traits as well depending on the context). So, be on the lookout for that common mistake. When you’re trying to determine if someone is a dominant judger or not (Fe/Te/Ti/Fi dom), you are looking for someone who constantly makes JUDGEMENTS- whether something is a good thing or a bad thing (Fi/Fe) or whether something is valid or invalid (Ti/Te). I’m actually going to start with the Thinking functions (Ti/Te) first, because once you understand them, it will actually be easier to understand the difference between the Feeling functions (Fi/Fe). Fe is very analogous to Te, it just focuses on the moral sphere rather than in the validity one. Fi is also very analogous to Ti in the same manner. Additionally, for the judgment functions I’ll try to use two examples to help illustrate them: a crying friend (to approach an ethics question) and whether or not a unicorn will run down the street tomorrow (to approach a validity question). Te (extraverted thinking) Te is a judging function that determines if something is invalid or valid based on a heuristic and is heavily related to inductive reasoning. The heuristic is a rule of thumb or generalization that will have been created by an introverted perceiving function (Si or Ni). Heuristics usually are statements that begin with or include qualifier words like “generally”, ”often”, ”tends to”, etc. Te will take the new information presented and determine if it is valid or invalid based on how well it matches the heuristic. Te is the “therefore” part of a sentence and leads to a conclusion. Te is a judgment function that sacrifices accuracy in order to come to a quick conclusion (Note: with inductive reasoning, you can never be certain that your conclusion is true, you just aim for a conclusion that is *likely* or *probably* true) Crying friend example (ethics): What is the reason they are crying? Ok they are crying because of X. Generally, when someone has problem X they can solve it by doing Y (heuristic statement created by Ni or Si). Therefore, it is valid for me to share Y solution with this crying person right now (Te conclusion). That will be the most helpful in this scenario. Unicorn example (validity): I don’t know what this unicorn thing is, but it has run down the street for the past week. Generally, if something has been occurring for that long, it is safe to assume it will continue occurring (heuristic statement). Therefore, it is valid to assume that the unicorn will run down the street tomorrow as well (Te conclusion). Philosophy concept: See the Ni section for more information on heuristics. For inductive reasoning, you can learn about it here (short video) and here (longer video (ignore the part about abductive reasoning, which is neither Te or Ti). An article on inductive reasoning can be found here. Misconceptions: Te is not blunt, Te is not evil, and Te is not efficient in everyday language (e.g. just because you finish your work quickly, does not mean you are a Te user). Te does not mean that you yell at everyone. Te does not mean that you are ambitious. Being a Te user does not mean you are angry all the time. Te does not mean you are a scary person who steps on people. These are stereotypes that will make you miss a Te user if you are not paying attention. What you’re looking for when typing: A character who often uses qualifiers like “generally”, ”often”, ”tends to”, etc when reasoning. A character who often points out when something doesn’t match a trend. A character who prefers using generalizations to categorize people and things (Note: you see this in Fe users as well). A character who may present their assumptions and generalizations as if they are facts. Character examples: Kujou Sakurako (ENTJ) from Beautiful Bones -Sakurako's Investigationis one of the best examples of the Te judgment function. She is one of the very rare “detectives” in anime that uses Te over Ti to solve cases. When she’s reasoning, she is very comfortable using heuristics and generalizations to come to a conclusion. Another great character to better understand The reasoning is Louis (ENTJ) from Beastars. Louis struggles with understanding Legoshi (ISFP) because Louis has a heuristic that he strongly adheres to of how carnivores should be, and thus Louis keeps trying to prove himself right by making assumptions and predictions on how Legoshi and others will act based on those heuristics. With Louis’ character, the qualifiers are not outright stated, but implied. This is something else to look out for when trying to type a character. Kanie Seiya (ENTJ) from Amagi Brilliant Park and Sayaka Kanamori (ESTJ) from Eizouken are also great characters to better understand Te reasoning because they both are characters who use trends, heuristics, and generalizations to help get an idea off of the ground. Sayaka in particular is a great example because her Te gets directly contrasted with Midori’s Ti in the series. Sayaka also uses Te to poke a lot of holes in people’s arguments. I also recommend checking out the tertiary Te user Zylith (ENFP) from the webcomic Freaking Romance because in the story you can see how Zylith generalizes people in her past (e.g. oh some people in my past have been like this → so it’s safe to assume all people are like this). It can sometimes be easier to spot Te in a tertiary user over a dominant user, hence I wanted to use her as an example. Ti (introverted thinking) Ti is a judging function that determines if something is valid or invalid based on logical consistency and is heavily related to deductive reasoning. Ti asks if the premises/statements are consistent with one another and if the new knowledge presented is consistent with other premises/statements that were previously determined to be true. Unlike Te, Ti focuses on accuracy and thus usually takes a bit longer than Te to reach a conclusion. For Ti, if the premises/statements are true, then the conclusion that arises from those premises must then also be true. Crying friend example (ethics): Premise 1: This person is crying, Premise 2: Soothing a person requires emotional intelligence, Premise 3: I struggle with that, Premise 4: This person hates not being soothed, Premise 5: I would like to retain a friendship with this person → Conclusion: I should say something to show my support in order to keep this friendship → “Uh, I hope you feel better.” Unicorn example (validity): I know nothing about this unicorn. There is no evidence to support that just because a unicorn ran down the street everyday for the past week, that it will run down the street tomorrow as well. The reverse is also true however- there is no evidence to suggest that it won’t run down the street tomorrow either. Therefore, it would be invalid to say that a unicorn will or won’t run down the street tomorrow based on the current information at hand. Philosophy concept: This video once again is a good basic example of deductive (Ti) vs. inductive (Te) reasoning. A more detailed, but concise video of deductive arguments can be found here. Misconceptions: Ti does not mean you are a nerd. Ti does not mean that you hate people. Ti does not mean you are a detective. Ti does not mean that you cannot make plans or have no ambition. Ti does not mean you are always correct (i.e. if your premises are incorrect, then your conclusion will also be incorrect- which is why a lot of Ti users will call Ti a “garbage in, garbage out” function). Ti does not mean you are a math genius. Ti does not mean you cannot enjoy life. Ti is not a “smartness” function. What you’re looking for when typing a character: A character who is very accurate and precise with words. A character who strongly dislikes ambiguity. A character who puts facts and statements together and assesses the consistency of those facts and statements with one another. A character who prefers using deductive reasoning over inductive reasoning. A character who may assume “I think this way (regarding validity), so other people likely think this way as well. I am the average person when it comes to reasoning,” and then may feel ashamed or that something is wrong with them when they discover multiple other people have reached a different conclusion (though this is not a requirement to be a Ti user, just a tendency). A character who may not like to be rushed. A character who often points out inconsistencies in logical reasoning. A character who may be so focused on the literal meaning of a statement/information that they may overlook the context in which that statement/information was given. Character examples: A wonderful and extreme example of Ti is Majime Mitsuya (INTP) from Fune wo Amu. Majime is extremely precise and accurate with the definitions of words, which is a skill he uses to create a dictionary. The vast majority of detective anime also feature Ti users who use deductive reasoning to solve mysteries like Sherlock Holmes (ISTP) from Moriarty the Patriot and Aya Rindou (xSTP) from Undead Girl Murder Farce. In terms of the creative process, Midori Asakusa (INTP) from Eizouken is a good example of a creative Ti user because you can also see how she stops her Ne processing function every few seconds to ensure what she is imaging is logically consistent. Another great example of a “non-brilliant” Ti user is Osaka from Azumanga Daioh. In this one video alone, you can see just how much Osaka uses Ti- she takes words and information literally and she is easily able to come to a conclusion based on logical consistency (especially at timestamp 7:40-8:15). Now that we have the Thinking functions away, we can focus on the Feeling functions. Feeling deals with ethics and morals (Note: I will be using these terms interchangeably here, but it is good to note that ethics and morals are actually distinct terms that refer to slightly different things, but we don’t have to worry about that in this context). We can now make the following analogies because we went over Thinking functions: Fe is the ethical/moral analogy to Te, while Fi is ethical/moral analogy to Ti. Fe and Te both use heuristics to come to quick conclusions (and thus require introverted perceiving functions to work) that allow them to deal with the situation now, while Ti and Fi both focus on internal consistency to come to an answer that will give them long-term satisfaction (for Ti you make more accurate conclusions, for Fi- there’s not really an analogous term for “accurate” in ethics, but in general Fi users make conclusions that will allow them to feel more *content* with their decisions in the long-term). Fe and Te are flexible and tend to be focused on the short-term, while Fi and Ti are rigid and tend to come to conclusions that will be consistent over time. Fe (extraverted feeling) Fe is a judging function that determines if something is good or bad (or morally wrong or right) by using moral heuristics/generalizations/rules of thumb. Fe uses a criteria external to itself (and that criteria can either be a moral heuristic created by an introverted perceiving function like Si or Ni, or a reference external to oneself like a parent or a community), and determines if something is good or bad based on whether or not it matches that criteria. Fe uses moral heuristics because it is focused on making quick decisions that will allow the user to maintain (or destroy) group harmony. For Fe users, you are looking for an implied “normally” that indicates the criteria/heuristic they are using (created by Si or Ni), and an implied “therefore” statement that indicates the conclusion that was reached by Fe. Crying friend example (ethics): Normally, when people are hurt they just want support and a shoulder to cry on (heuristic created by Ni or Si). Therefore, it would be considered good if I hear them out and validate their emotions. Unicorn example (validity): A unicorn coming down the street? Normally, that would be something part of a parade or something right? (Heuristic created by Ni or Si) As long as everyone is safe and the unicorn parade isn’t hurting anyone, then it would be considered good just to enjoy it or ignore it (Fe conclusion). However, if it is hurting someone then we should call the cops (Fe conclusion) because normally when something is unsafe people call the authorities (heuristic created by Ni or Si). [Note that Fe did not consider the actual question of validity here and this is where Thinking and Feeling users typically clash]. Philosophy concept: Fe uses moral heuristics as a basis to make judgements (See the Ni section for an overview of heuristics). Now, moral heuristics is a more academic term that is not used in everyday language, so I can’t recommend a video about it specifically and to learn more about it the concept we’d have to delve into academic territory. For the truly curious, there are a few academic papers about the issues of using moral heuristics and one such paper can be found here. But really you should be fine if you think of Fe as analogous to Te in the realm of moral judgements. Misconceptions: Fe is not empathy or sympathy. Fe is not kindness. Fe is not righteousness. Fe does not necessarily mean you can read people well (while this is a tendency of Fe users it is not a requirement and it is also not an ability exclusive to Fe users- because the “reading” ability actually comes from your introverted perceiving function not your judging function). Fe does not mean you are self-sacrificing. Fe does not necessarily mean that you are controlling. Fe is not manipulation (Fe can be used to manipulate/impact group harmony, but it is not manipulation itself). Being a Fe user does not necessarily mean you are a fake person. Being an Fe user does not mean you lack strong morals. Being an Fe user does not necessarily mean you are always socially graceful (You can be a dom or aux Fe user and still be socially awkward). Fe does not mean you are a pushover. All that is required to be an Fe user is a preference to determine if something is good or bad (or right or wrong) using external criteria/moral heuristics. What you’re looking for when typing: A character who often points out that something is right or wrong based on social norms, moral heuristics, or some other external criteria. A character who may tend to generalize which *types/groups* of people are good or bad. A character who may judge others based on how well they adhere to social/group norms and also tries to conform to social/group norms and morals themselves. A character who is *comfortable* with sacrificing personal contentment in order to upkeep the present group harmony (contrary to popular belief, Fi users can also sacrifice themselves for the group, but it not something they are *comfortable* with doing as it is not their natural preference). A character who may consider and think of themselves in terms of the role(s) they play in various groups (e.g. Instead of “I” it’s “the son/daughter”, “the student”, “the tutor/teacher/mentor”, “the friend”, “the professional”, etc). A character who speaks with an implied (or perhaps directly states) “normally” when making ethical/moral judgments. Remember, Fe does not *make* the moral heuristic (Si or Ni does), it just determines if something is right or wrong based whether that something *matches* or *adheres to* the heuristic. Character examples: Tatewaki Shoutarou (ESFJ) from Beautiful Bones -Sakurako's Investigation- is a great example of an Fe user as he is often forced to directly state what his moral heuristics are due to his work with an Fi user who has absolutely no care for social norms. You will see Tatewaki use the term “normally” in his speech quite often. He is a decent character to start with if you are trying to learn what Fe actually is. Yatora from the manga Blue Period (and I heavily recommend reading the manga over the anime) is also a good example of an Fe user. He uses external criteria to determine what is good and what he should do. In the first chapter alone, he references what his father, mother, and teacher think are right/good (external criteria) and therefore decides those are the things he should do to be considered a good person/good son/good student (Fe conclusion). Another great Fe user is Shuli (ESFJ) from the webcomic The Fantasie of a Stepmother. Shuli focuses on her role as a high-ranking noble despite being only 16 and tries to navigate her life based on the expectations of her role. Because this is a time regression webcomic, she also gets to see where her Fe conclusions/decisions in the past may have led to misunderstandings and conflict. Shuli is actually one of my favorite Fe users, so I hope you give her a try! Fi (introverted feeling) Fi is a judging function that determines if something is good or bad (or morally right or wrong) based on consistency with one’s own existing set of internal/personal values. Fi is most related to ethical consistency and focuses on decisions/conclusions that will allow the user to be *content* with said decisions/conclusions in the long-term. Fi tends to be self-referencing and comes to conclusions based on one's own past experiences. Fi is essentially the golden rule, “treat others as you wish to be treated.” Crying friend example (ethics): Oh, I’ve been through a similar situation that led my friend to cry before. When I was sad, I wanted someone to hold me, listen to me, and give me advice. It would be a good thing to do that for my friend now because I want them to feel better. Unicorn example (validity): A unicorn running down the street? If I was that unicorn, I would probably be running down the street because I was bewildered and scared. Perhaps the unicorn is lost. It would be a good thing to try to befriend it and help it get back home. [Note that Fi did not consider the actual question of validity here and again this is where Thinking and Feeling users typically clash.] Philosophy concept: Fi is most related to ethical consistency. Again, just like with Fe- we are running into academic territory here so it’s hard to find a lot of short and concise sources, but one video that kind of delves into ethical consistency is this one (where “rash moral judgements” would be more like Fe). Here is also an academic article about ethical consistency. Please note, when I say that Fi users want to be *content* with their decisions, it does not mean that they want to make a selfish decision that will best benefit themselves over others. Rather, by content I mean that Fi users want to make sure that they will be able to live with themselves and the decisions they make in the long term. Fi users do not want to regret things, so they use themselves as a reference of how they would like to be treated in a particular situation in order to come to a conclusion. The reason Fi users use themselves as a reference that typically humans want to be treated well. If humans have a natural tendency to prioritize themselves over others, then treating others as you want to be treated (yes, that golden rule is essentially Fi) will most likely bring the most contentment to you and others in the long-term. Additionally, using yourself as a reference allows you to be consistent since you are using the same standard across the board. Misconceptions: Fi is not selfishness. Fi is not pushy. Fi is not crying. Fi does not mean you never sacrifice yourself for the group. Fi does not mean you are a judgemental person. Fi does not mean you are blunt or rude. Fi does not necessarily mean you are socially awkward. Fi does not mean you cannot value rules and guidelines. Fi does not mean you are childish. Fi does not mean you are naive. Fi does not mean you entirely lack social etiquette. Fi is not greed. Fi is not psychopathy. Fi does not mean you lack empathy, sympathy, and/or you or not kind, and it also does not necessarily mean you have those things (Neither Fe or Fi are these things). Fi does not mean you lack emotional intelligence. Fi does not mean you lack typical intelligence. Fi does not mean you aren’t charming. What you’re looking for when typing: A character who may have a high sense of integrity and wants to be ethically consistent. A character who says something along the lines of, “if I did X then I wouldn’t be able to live with myself” or “if I was in that situation, then I would want Y not Z.” A character who uses themselves as a reference when making ethical decisions. A character who may break-down or feel a loss of identity if they continuously sacrifice themselves for the group at the cost of their own ethical consistency. Likewise, a character who may break-down if they are ethically inconsistent in their decision making. A character who may be rigid in their ethics regardless of the social context or social environment. Similarly, a character who is *consistent* in their ethics regardless of the social environment. A character you might be able to put the phrase (“It would be good/bad to consider that ___”) before most of their quotes/declarative statements. Character examples: Two great examples of Fi are Anzu Hoshino (ENFP) from Romantic Killer and Kai (ENFP) from Piano no Mori/The Forest Piano (I’m referring to the anime series here for Piano no Mori, but the anime movie works as well). Regardless of social pressures or contexts, these two characters stay consistent with their ethical decisions over time and proudly assert those decisions. Another example of a Fi user is Jaeun (IxFP) from the webcomic Pyramid Game. In this story, Jauen’s dominant Fi is directly contrasted with Suji’s (ENTJ) Te. Jaeun’s Fi is rigid and she desires to be consistent no matter what. Another great example of a dominant Fi user is Akari (INFP) from Aria the Animation. Akari filters the world through her Fi (the other characters in the show even call it the “Akari filter”). Often, an implied “it would be good to consider that __'' can be placed before all of her quotes. She is a great character if you are trying to better understand the beauty of Fi. Another character is Mitsuki (INFP) from Full Moon wo Sagashite. Mitsuki is a 12-year-old girl who uses her Fi heavily despite being faced with death. An instant example that comes to mind was episode 6 where she met a girl named Nanami and said something along the lines, “if I was in your position, I would want X, why isn’t it like that?” Because Mitsuki is young, it will be easier to see how Fi manifests in different situations via her character.