The First MBTI Type & Cognitive Function Video You Should Ever Watch


This is a TwFP primer on MBTI and Cognitive Functions. You can get the companion PDF for this video for FREE here:
FB page:
The room is always open, always recording, and always uploading to the raw channel. By entering either of the twfp raw rooms ( and/or}, you are consenting to having your image, voice, text communication, and any other representation form that may occur while in the room. Talking With Famous People strives to be respectful of others’ wishes and will attempt to honor reasonable requests for content removal due to occasional mistakes as do happen from time to time. TwFP, however, is under no obligation to remove any content at the request of a participant, and will not honor anticipatory or future-oriented requests, nor abuse of such requests (as determined by TwFP at its sole discretion and with or without information. IF YOU DO NOT CONSENT TO BEING FEATURED ON THE YOUTUBE CHANNEL, DO NOT ENTER THE RAW ROOMS!
Video Rating: / 5

Like it? Share with your friends!



  1. 3:33 6:50 Each of the function types is on an axis. Is it fair to say the order in which we prioritize and attend to things will stay consistent across time, but the time allotted and weight given the functions and their conscious vs subconscious modalities will develop and change as we mature?

  2. Hi, do you do typings at all? I've been struggling with my type for years now and I still have no idea what I am. I have only really ever typed as an INFP but my thinking on it changes constantly so I'm never satisfied I'm correctly identified. Thanks!

  3. I've been thinking a lot about how different people derive and apply schemas, (by schema i mean a concept about what is going on in their life) and am unsure of how to analyze it in terms of MBTI. For instance, I as an INTP think about schemas in a hypothetical version of my mental world, and my friend an ENTJ thinks about everything in the same mental construct of reality that he lives and functions in (almost like a dream to me). Also, I know some INTJ's who cant seem to even maintain a solid active world view, they live in the hypothetical (equally dream like to me). I've been thinking perhaps that S and F are used to derive schemas, and that N and T are used to apply them, but I may be wrong in a few ways. I also am unsure of how I and E effect this.

  4. 1* This may seem contradictory to the whole notion of Perception which withholds making judgements or organising information in addition to the common notion of Ti=deductive and Te=inductive but here, the focus is not on the organisation of perceived data (Judging) but the mode of perception itself by means of deduction and induction.

    1.1. Since Perception is irrational, induction and deduction here do not seek to make sense of the Perceived data but only describe the method of flow of that data between Sensing and Intuition (or vice versa) without being affected or organised by the Rational processes (T/F).

    2.0. Dominant Intuition, which neglects details in favour of the bigger abstract picture, is essentially inductive in that it goes from the whole to the parts, characterised by inferior and unconscious Sensing ultimately seeking grounding in reality but also providing material for dominant Intuition to intuit possibilities from, as a starting point.

    2.01. Inferior Si provides the Ne dominant a personal impressionistic database of reality to form novel associations and connections in the external world.

    2.02. Inferior Se provides the Ni dominant commonly observable reality to use and fill in the blanks to generate something completely new.

    2.1. Then, Intuition, being inductive, first understands the overall picture and then proceeds to concrete reality and its details.

    2.11. Dominant Intuition, being inductive, would then appear to be inconclusive as reality would be malleable depending on the overall picture generated but the overall picture would be infinitely more trusted which is why, seeking grounding in reality, the dominant intuitive would be inconclusive in the representation of reality.

    3.0. Dominant Sensing, which neglects the bigger picture, is essentially deductive in that it goes from the parts to the whole, characterised by inferior and unconscious Intuition ultimately seeking to connect these sensations to generate the whole and thus forms the basis of their surety in trusting sensory data.

    3.01. Inferior Ni seeks to get a brief idea of what is going to happen so that dominant Se can rush in, going all out, to save the day.

    3.02. Inferior Ne is aware of all the unpleasant possibilities or alternatives so that dominant Si can stick with the safest and most consistent one, according to its impressionistic archive of reality.

    3.1. Then, Sensing, being deductive, first understands the details/parts and then proceeds to generate the overall picture.

    3.11. Dominant Sensing, being deductive, would then appear to be conclusive as only the conclusions would be malleable depending on the details observed/compared which would be trusted wholeheartedly and this makes the dominant Sensor less interpretative, more concrete and hence, conclusive as to their perception of reality.

    4. Ironically, deduction, while being internally sound, can be disastrously incorrect if the basic premises are misused and in the case of dominant sensing, the basic premises are clearer if not more accurate than in the case of Intuition.

    4.1. This is contradictory to the aforementioned propositions since the products of Sensing represent concrete reality but this contradiction is cleared away by reasoning that as long as Sensing is accompanied by Intuition (which it always is), it will always be interpretative in some sense (owing to subjectivity) and therefore, perception of total objective/concrete reality is impossible which is why the basic premises of Sensing (as a form of deduction), in the form of sensory input, can be misused to generate disastrously incorrect conclusions or paranoid viewpoints.

    *The propositions n.1, n.2, n.3, etc. are comments on proposition no. n; the propositions
    n.m1, n.m2, etc. are comments on proposition no. n.m; and so on.


    • Intuition → One to the many (Induction, multiple conclusions depending on each case).
    • Sensing → Many to the one (Deduction, single conclusion from hypotheses).

  5. What's with the wonky formatting and abrupt music changes? Your videos have become more dynamic. Very informative like usual.

  6. Something is bugging me when I look at MBTI's stacks, such as Ne Ti Fe Si. If someone thinks that those are the ONLY functions they use, they'll inevitably come to misunderstand the functions with attitudes. MBTI ignores that if you are good at one function attitude, you'll usually also be able to use the opposite function attitude only a little bit less well, rather than lack it entirely.
    So for a four part MBTI style stack for ENTP (as an example) to be complete, it would be closer to something like

    Ne/Ni, Ti/Te, Fe/Fi, Si/Se

    Lots of intuition, good deal of thinking, weaker at feeling, inferior sensing.
    So an ENTP that has internalized this model doesn't assume that all of the thinking they use is Ti, which would cause a gross misunderstanding of both Te and Ti.

Comments are closed.