Attributes of the Top 4 Functions

Cognitive functions are complicated and confusing. This is a fact. This is why everyone argues over them, and this is why newcomers to the 16 personalities start with the dichotomies, and some of those infamously bad personality tests. It’s the easy, and fun way to dip one’s toe in, at the beginning. I see people try constantly rant about the bad naming system, the dichotomies and etc. (myself even being one to do it in the past), but in reality, if the cognitive functions were the initial gateway, most people would quickly give up. But with that being said, as one delves further and further into the 16 types, they must eventually take the plunge if they are to understand the system with any degree of accuracy.

Today, I wanted to address a fairly basic concept that I see beginners mess up. Bear in mind that this is not meant to criticize. Many facets of this theory are not well covered, explained, or even specifically called out, in addition to the fact that so much of the information is generally convoluted and confusing. It’s only natural that a lot of misunderstandings ensue.

So, the subject is this: cognitive function placement matters.

If you’ve been into Myers-Briggs or the 16 types for any length of time, you’ve probably heard terms like shadow functions, or shadow personalities. You might have heard about how we each have all 8 functions. You may have heard terms like “critical parent”, “trickster”, “demon”, and etc. These all refer to function placement, and different roles that a function will play when in that position in your function stack.

Now, if you’ve been following us at Practical Typing for any length of time, you probably know that we are not proponents of the 8 function stack. We see the 8 function stack as an unnecessary complication, which is often used to rationalize being the wrong personality type. If one needs to dip into the lower 4 functions to justify being a certain type then something is lacking, whether that be their knowledge of the functions or their knowledge of themselves. In my experience, anything that a person tries to rationalize with the lower 4 functions can be more easily explained by the primary 4.

I’m not trying to dive to deep into the weeds here, but I am trying to lay some basic groundwork. Bottom line is that many people recognize that there is something to function placement, which is why those terms are always being thrown around. However, while that does seem to be widely recognized, I still mistakenly see people try to apply a function’s strengths equally across all placements. You can’t do that without opening yourself up to error.

Ultimately, the function positions that matter the most, are the the most basic ones: the top four. If you can understand those, and I mean really understand those, you’ll start to grasp this huge convoluted mess that is the 16 personalities. I’m going to attempt to provide a general overview in this article, along with explaining how a placement generally manifests.

What are the top 4 positions?

All throughout this site (and many others), you’ll see us refer to the Dominant, Auxiliary, Tertiary, and Inferior functions. These refer to a function’s placement within one’s cognitive function stack. The dominant function is the first function in the stack, followed by the auxiliary (or second), the tertiary (or third), and lastly, the inferior (or fourth). These terms are used because they allude to how high of a priority a certain personality type will place on that function position, or how much they will naturally rely on it.

The Dominant Function

The dominant function is one’s primary function. You can attribute all of the strengths AND weaknesses to someone who has a function as their dominant. Why weaknesses? Well, high placement in the function stack actually means range of use rather than meaning it will always be healthy use. In other words, having a function as your dominant does not mean you’ll automatically be able to use it in a healthy way; it really just means it will be your default, your go-to. You will use your dominant function A LOT. You may use it really really poorly, or really really well. You’ll likely have the ability to do both, and maybe you’ll flip flop between the two.

For instance, Ne used in a positive manner is optimistic, (focused on positive possibilities). Ne used in a negative manner is paranoid and pessimistic (focused on every single way something could go wrong.). An ENFP’s Ne could manifest in either of these ways.

Oftentimes, each personality type is described as its best possible manifestation, as the ideal. This is a nice notion, but it’s fantasy. A generally unhealthy or immature person might use every single function in their stack in a bad way (including their dominant function), which will produce a character that is no where near the often described ideal.

The Auxiliary Function

The auxiliary function is one’s secondary function. It’s used in support of the dominant, and thus is in service to the dominant. This means that its focus will be narrowed in on whatever the dominant is focused on. It’ll effectively be more “close-minded” than the the dominant function.

One’s auxiliary function should still have a fairly wide range of use (barring loop and grip scenarios), similar to the dominant, just slightly less prioritized. As with the dominant, one’s auxiliary can overall skew positive or negative at any given time, and can vary wildly, depending on the overall health of the individual. However, assuming the individual is not looping, the auxiliary function should be fairly well-utilized, and not a source of stress for the user. It likely won’t be viewed as problematic, and will be overall seen as neutral. Of course, as mentioned, this is assuming an average, healthy person.

The Tertiary Function

The tertiary function is one’s third function. It has the same orientation as the dominant, meaning both are either introverted or extraverted. Sometimes this allows an individual to tap into it more easily than the auxiliary, which is why looping seems to be fairly common. Most people have gotten stuck in a loop at some point in their life, whether briefly or more long term.

Given standard development, people usually become conscious of this function as they reach adulthood. For instance, I became hyper aware of my Ni around the age of 20. This is not to say that I never used my tertiary function before that point; it’s literally a matter of awareness. Functions come in pairs, and one cannot exist without the other. However, due to the heightened awareness a person gains of their tertiary and the subsequent focus they begin to place on it, many people feel as if their tertiary function is stronger than it actually is. I typed as an ISTP in my teens, but began to wonder if I was an INTP once my Ni started to surface. My situation is extremely common. Many tertiary intuitive function users mistake themselves for intuitives, just like tertiary thinking function users can mistake themselves for thinkers.

As a whole, the tertiary function is typically utilized enough to be an asset, but it is not often a source of stress because a healthy individual will not over-focus on it. It’ll help bolster and backup the auxiliary without cancelling out it’s action or primary directive.

The Inferior Function

The inferior function is one’s fourth function. It is the weakest. This function will have least range of use, and when immature or under-developed, may surface as being against whatever the typical mentality is for that function. For instance, inferior Fe may surface as being against the group’s well-being. Inferior Se may be closed off to experiences. Inferior Ne may be against new possibilities. Inferior Fi may be anti-individuality. Etc.

Oftentimes, I see people try to apply the widely known strengths of a function indiscriminately to those who have that same function in the inferior position. That is a mistake. The inferior function often surfaces poorly, and is a source of insecurity for the user. I’ve heard it said that people focus heavily on developing their inferior sometime in their 30s. I’ve observed that to be true, assuming the person is healthy and developing. I say it this way because some people spend their entire lives relying primarily on their top two functions. It’s those people that tend to fit the stereotypical description for whatever their type is. The more mature you get, the less you should fit your type description because those descriptions essentially describe an imbalanced state.