Derivation of the Meanings of the Basic Functions

PART 1. Block of intuitive-sensory functions

Underlying meanings:

• presence of activity = extraversion; absence = introversion;
• working with matter = sensing; with information = intuition;
• working with the category of benefit (for oneself and for others) = Judiciousness; with the category of harm (to inflict on others and avoid oneself) = Decisiveness;
• indulging instinctive programs laid down by nature = irrationality; consciously acting contrary to them for the sake of social goals = rationality.

ES (extraverted sensing) = material activity, physical actions aimed at restructuring the reality given in sensations.

Including:

• Se (SLE+SEE) inflicting material harm and troubles on others [as competitors for the same ecological niche];
• anti-Ni (ESE+LSE) conscious production of material benefits, of things pleasant for others [as for allies].

IN (introverted intuition) = material inaction, absence of physical activity.

Including:

• Ni (IEI+ILI) inaction leading to the non-production of benefit, of things pleasant for others [as for predator-competitors living by taking from others];
• anti-Se (LII+EII) conscious refusal to act for the purpose of not inflicting harm or troubles on others [as allies].

EN (extraverted intuition) = informational activity, actions aimed at obtaining information, intellectual efforts to restructure the synaptic networks of one’s own and others’ consciousness.

Including:

• Ne (ILE+IEE) search for, perception, and dissemination of pleasant information, that is, information that, as laid down by nature, is more likely to be potentially useful [for oneself and allies];
• anti-Si (EIE+LIE) conscious search for, perception, and dissemination of unpleasant information [which maintains vigilance and prevents competitors from causing harm].

IS (introverted sensing) = informational inaction, refusal to perceive and disseminate new information.

Including:

• Si (SEI+SLI) non-perception and non-dissemination of unpleasant information, that is, information that, as laid down by nature, is potentially harmful [which is beneficial for oneself and allies, since it makes it possible to preserve the positive state of mind necessary for life];
• anti-Ne (LSI+ESI) conscious refusal to perceive and disseminate pleasant information [which prevents competitors who use pleasant information as bait from causing harm].

Conclusions from Part 1 regarding the possible semantic content of weak traits associated with the inertia of functions:

Statics = the material world is unpleasant, information is pleasant; dynamics = the material world is pleasant, information is unpleasant.

The thesis echoes the definition of statics as more ascetic [the material world is unpleasant], while at the same time more truthful and more inclined toward principled ideological commitment [information is pleasant].

Carefreeness = there is a clearer, more elaborated, and more adequate program for what and when to do or not do with the perception of information; Foresight = what and when to do or not do in the material world.

The thesis echoes the definition of carefree types as more prone to gossip [taking an active part in regulating the surrounding exchange of information], and foresight types as more prone to innovation [possessing a clearer program of actions for the future] and more resistant to monotony [following a clear program of action without random switching]. Overall, carefree types possess a more developed system for the precise and comprehensive perception of information, whereas foresight types possess a more developed system for translating an intention into a scenario of action.

Strategy = there is a clearer, more elaborated, and more adequate program for how to relate to the unpleasant side of reality (to perform or refrain from unpleasant actions, to accept or ignore the unpleasant); tactics = the same, but with respect to the pleasant side of reality.

The thesis echoes the tendency of strategists to fixate on the subject of global catastrophes, and of tacticians to delve into small details of a situation [unpleasant things are associated with the destruction of things, which usually occurs abruptly and in a coarse, global manner, whereas pleasant things are more often associated with creation, which always proceeds gradually, in small steps].

Conclusions from Part 1 regarding the meanings of the classical functions.

The meanings of Ne and Se generally correspond to the commonly accepted images of these functions. Ne is an impulsively curious child who is careless in dealing with the new; Se is an adult oriented toward forcefully displacing competitors and prone to impulsive aggression.

At the basis of Ni is an unwillingness to do anything out of concern that this may attract the attention of predators (this may be accompanied by waiting and looking for a moment when something can be picked up and quickly consumed without leaving traces). At the basis of Si is an unwillingness to think about an unpleasant scenario of further development, even to leave the comfort zone mentally.

Ni is only weakly associated with the concept of linearly unfolding time. Only the creative, extraverted form of Ni (indicated as anti-Si) raises the topic of time - as a sequential conscious advance through a zone of discomfort, driven by a sense of an escalating crisis. The program form of Ni lacks this activity and perceives time as an external flow of events in which the subject occupies a passive, waiting position. Time as a sequence of acts of creation and growth in well-being is not merely not Ni, but is in fact quite clearly anti-Ni.

Si is associated with the concepts of comfort and physical health, but only the creative, extraverted form of Si (indicated as anti-Ni) actively monitors its own and others’ health and, in order to achieve comfort, actively improves the surrounding space at the material level (creating various “treats” for others). Program Si is passive in the material world and focused on internal comfort, which it achieves primarily by repressing unpleasant thoughts and thereby eliminating neurotic destructive activity.

Thus, it should be acknowledged that the traditional understanding of Ni as the intuition of time planning and Si as the sensing of creating comfort was formed mainly through observation of the creative, extraverted (and therefore more accessible to observation) manifestations of these functions. Whereas in their basic introverted essence these functions focus on diametrically opposite things: the perception of time is associated with the balance of the Si function (and by no means Ni), while material actions aimed at maintaining health and comfort are associated with the balance of the Ni function (and by no means Si).

Specifically, strong inert Si nullifies the concept of time - it makes its course cyclical and shortens the observable future (thereby removing various sources of anxiety from consciousness), whereas strong inert Ni, through its passivity, minimizes the comfort of the surrounding environment and in fact deliberately creates a zone of disrepair around itself (allowing everything that can deteriorate to deteriorate) in order to reduce its attractiveness and “tastiness” to potential predators.

PART 2. Block of logical-ethical functions

Underlying meanings:

• presence of activity = extraversion; absence of activity = introversion;
• working with the categories of objective benefit and harm = logic; with the category of subjective significance, the internal sense of the value/non-value of something for oneself and others = ethics;
• advancing one’s subjective desires, imposing one’s life principles on the surrounding world = subjectivism (Merriness); following others’ subjective desires, skillfully adapting to them as to objective circumstances of the surrounding world = objectivism (Seriousness).
• dominance in decision-making of the modes “must/must not” (whose source may be either the individual or external groups) = rationality; ignoring and denying this mode = irrationality.

1. ET (extraverted logic) = one’s own activity, direct action (intellectual and physical).

Including:

• Te (LIE+LSE) Te thesis: “we do what ‘must’ be done, that is, what others want (even through our own ‘I don’t want to’).”
  Conscious action within rules established by other subjects in order to receive payment for implementing others’ desires.
• anti-Fi (ILE+SLE) anti-Fi thesis: “we do what we want, even if it ‘must not’ be done, that is, even if others do not want it.”
  Action as the spontaneous imposition of one’s own agency on others, with the aim of bringing one’s desires into reality / subordinating reality to one’s desires.

2. IF = (introverted ethics) = absence of one’s own activity (and, consequently - dependence on others, a need for support and/or external guidance), refraining from any actions destructive to another person’s self-esteem as a way of preserving the subjective significance of relations with oneself, and thus preserving those relations.

Including:

• Fi (ESI+EII) Fi thesis: “we do not do what ‘must not’ be done, that is, what others do not want (even if we ourselves would like to do it).”
  Conscious restriction of personal activity in accordance with rules established by other subjects - refusal of any actions that may be perceived as devaluing another person’s agency.
• anti-Te (SEI+IEI) anti-Te thesis: “we do not do what we do not want to do, even if it ‘must’ be done, that is, even if others want us to do so.”
  Spontaneous personal inaction for subjective reasons. For example: unwillingness to do some work simply because the required actions are dissonant with the subject’s inner essence; unwillingness to condemn someone whom others condemn (the latter, incidentally, is also the basis of the duality of anti-Te with anti-Fi, which is prone to antisocial self-will).

3. EF (extraverted ethics) = social activity - motivating others toward greater activity by increasing the subjective significance of everything associated with it (for example, by means of decoration) and increasing the subjective self-esteem of everyone engaged in it (for example, by means of compliments), and, as a consequence - establishing social ties around oneself as a source of motivation.

Including:

• Fe (ESE+EIE) Fe thesis: “I motivate others to want to do what I and members of my group do (I say: ‘this is what must be done’).”
  Conscious suggestion of the subjective significance of one’s desires by means of an exaggerated expression of their significance (including through decoration and sacralization). Thereby - attracting others’ attention to these desires, creating and expanding a community of principled supporters of one’s values, united by a common style of thinking and behavior among its members. The leading motivation is the desire for love, approving attention, and assistance from as many people as possible.
• anti-Ti (SEE+IEE) anti-Ti thesis: “I motivate myself and members of my group to want to do what others do (I do not say: ‘this must not be done’).”
  Spontaneous adaptation to another person’s agency - a readiness, in order to be liked by someone and situationally fit into someone’s group, to adopt the values and style of thinking and action of that individual/group and begin increasing their subjective significance; but likewise a readiness to quickly and easily abandon all of this in order to be liked by someone else.

4. IT = (introverted logic) absence of social activity, and thereby - demotivation of others, leading to the isolation of the activities of different individuals from one another; unwillingness to organize one’s own group or join any others; development of self-sufficiency.

Including:

• Ti (LII+LSI) Ti thesis: “I demotivate myself and members of my group from wanting to do what others do (I say: ‘this must not be done’).”
  Conscious restriction of social contacts, both individual and group, and avoidance of changing one’s style of thinking and mode of action in order to be liked by someone - all so that one’s system is not objectively harmed by outsiders who live by different rules and do not recognize its subjective significance.
• anti-Fe (ILI+SLI) anti-Fe thesis: “I demotivate others from wanting to do what I and members of my group do (I do not say: ‘this is what must be done’).”
  A spontaneous desire not to be liked by outsiders so as not to expand one’s group around oneself (and in the extreme case - to continue remaining entirely alone) - because the individual’s way of life implies deriving benefit from solitary existence, from outsiders’ lack of knowledge about the sources of the individual’s income and means of subsistence.

Conclusions:

Four theses are possible that combine the theses of the dual functions of the logical-ethical group and, at their limit, generate four types of society:

Merry irrationals (anti-Fi + anti-Te): “we do what we want, and do not do what we do not want, ignoring others’ musts and must-nots.”

This is the position of groups possessing agency. They have no concern for the surrounding society; they behave in the world like savages, live according to their internal natural impulses, and feel no responsibility toward anyone who is not part of their group.

Serious rationals (Fi+Te): “we do what must be done and do not do what must not be done, overcoming our own wants and don’t-wants.”

This is the position of groups that have lost their agency. Outwardly, they are workaholics who adhere to their culture and possess a developed sense of responsibility toward others for the results of their work (and guilt, in the event of its poor quality).

Merry rationals (Ti+Fe): “we motivate outsiders to join us, and our own members not to join outsiders.”

This is the position of growing groups that strengthen their agency, turn their “wants” into “musts,” and impose them on the surrounding society. The leading tone here is set by system-oriented people who perceive the surrounding world as a field for their cultural expansion, and the nature of others as material for cultural cultivation.

Serious irrationals (anti-Ti + anti-Fe): “we motivate our own members to join outsiders, and outsiders not to join us.”

This is the position of groups dissolving into the external world and losing their agency. This type of people is characterized by a dismissive attitude toward their parental culture. They readily abandon any “must/must not” and “want/don’t want” under the influence of their momentary needs - one might say that in them “nature reasserts itself.”

Conclusions regarding the derived traits (associated with the inertia of the logical-ethical functions) will be presented later - we are still working on the formulations.

I. Yu. Romanov (socionavigator.com) 06.2025 - 07.2026, CC BY-NC 4.0