Psychological Types Quiz: A Tool for Learning about Jung's Psychological Functions

Please note that this tool is based on Jung's Psychological Types and not the later Myers-Briggs, Keirsey, Socionics, or any other online quiz that is named "Jungian" or that claims that it tests "Jungian cognitive functions."


This tool is intended to help explain Jung's ideas in simple language, and show how the definitions of "cognitive functions" found in most resources are very different from those originally described by Jung. The difference is so vast, in fact, that having prior knowledge of popular online resources, and not the original book, can be a hindrance to appreciating the original ideas presented by Jung. Indeed, it's even hard to find two resources that agree on the definitions of "cognitive functions". I suggest that, if you are interested in type, you purchase or rent a copy of the original Psychological Types by Carl Jung, and judge for yourself. If this tool is not faithful to the book, please apprise me of your thoughts.  Link to Psychological Types.

Ultimately, Jung may not have been completely correct in his dissertation, and those who came after him may have fared better or worse. Still, to force the ideas of Myers-Briggs, Keirsey, Socionics, and other available resources, on the concept of psychological function, or vice versa, can prove to throw this yet undeveloped field into more confusion, dissonance, and make-believe than to otherwise see them as separate entities.

This is a work in progress. The structure of the test is intentiona. This work may have many visible faults if taken as the usual psychological assessment questionnaire, because it isn't. What is most important is not to deviate from the meaning intended by Jung too much. Regarding the auxiliary and inferior functions: since they can develop at different degrees within the same type, as a general rule, other functions are less developed, and the way they manifest in a personality can be very different from where they are the primary function. The orientation of the auxiliary function is an unresolved issue, even with very explicit views given by some.

A note on results: 

There are many conflicting resources on what constitutes type. Growing more and more famous, especially due to websites and Youtube videos, that  type is made of 4 or 8 functions, with different "strengths". That concept is not valid according to Jungian theory. A type is one developed function, and possibly with an auxiliary supporting function. All people have thinking, feeling, sensation, and intuition, and it's easy to associate any of the conflicting systems to personal experience. That becomes easy when the meanings of functions is made to explain behavioural phenomena. Extroverted feeling, for example, means the extraverted type that is oriented by feeling, which is primarily guided by external cultural, group, tradition, society feeling values. However, often 'Fe' is seen as a quality of being emotionally expressive, leading to many arguments about who "uses" Fe and who does not. Another conflation comes from the different intentional uses of type definitions, like the popular Keirsey "temperament sorter". for example, SJ types are defined with no reference to Jungian functions. That lead to a mix up between Keirsey and MBTI, leading to MBTI types being described through Keirsey, and then going down to cognitive functions and redefining them accordingly. In this example, 'Si' is often seen as relating to memory, tradition, and order; attributes that were never intended. The introverted sensation type in Jungian psychology is an introvert oriented by the subjective experience of sensation released from object. If anything, they are more like impressionist artists than 'Guardians'.