The Deceiving Role (sometimes referred to as the 7th function)
The deceiving role fools us into thinking something is important to do or pay attention to. The process that fills this role is often not trusted or seen as worthy of attention, for when we do engage it, we may make mistakes in perception or in decision making. Then we feel double bound—trapped between two bad options. Yet this role can have a positive side as it provides comic relief. Then we can laugh at ourselves. It can be refreshing and join with the relief role as we recharge ourselves through play.  

So I find when I use my Ti: sit and logically think about things it makes me laugh.  The more I use logic, the more silly the world seems.

For me to get things done, I can’t really plan it out.  I just have to do things (Te) and they build themselves. Projects, spreadsheets just ‘emerge’ for me.

I guess I don’t use Ti much unless in a debate. BUT this leads to a question.  Other ENFPs out there:  When you sit and ponder logically, does the world seem silly?

INTJs, your 7^th function is Fe.  When you conceder the feelings and motivations of others, do you find them silly?

INTPs? How about Se?

 http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/enfp.html

 http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/16types.html

The Shadow Processes
The other four cognitive processes operate more on the boundaries of our awareness. It is as if they are in the shadows and only come forward under certain circumstances. We usually experience these processes in a negative way, yet when we are open to them, they can be quite positive.

 

The Opposing Role (sometimes referred to as the 5th function)
The opposing role is often how we get stubborn and argumentative—refusing to “play” and join in whatever is going on at the time. It might be easy for us to develop skill in the process that plays this role, but we are likely to be more narrow in our application of this skill, and it will likely take more energy to use it extensively. In its positive aspect, it provides a shadow or depth to our leading role process, backing it up and enabling us to be more persistent in pursuit of our goals.

The Critical Parent Role (sometimes referred to as the 6th function)
The critical parent role is how we find weak spots and can immobilize and demoralize others. We can also feel this way when others use the process that plays this role. It is often used sporadically and emerges more often under stressful conditions when something important is at risk. When we engage it, we can go on and on. To access its positive side of discovery, we must learn to appreciate and be open to it. Then it has an almost magical quality and can provide a profound sense of wisdom.

The Deceiving Role (sometimes referred to as the 7th function)
The deceiving role fools us into thinking something is important to do or pay attention to. The process that fills this role is often not trusted or seen as worthy of attention, for when we do engage it, we may make mistakes in perception or in decision making. Then we feel double bound—trapped between two bad options. Yet this role can have a positive side as it provides comic relief. Then we can laugh at ourselves. It can be refreshing and join with the relief role as we recharge ourselves through play.

The Devilish Role (sometimes referred to as the 8th function)
The devilish role can be quite negative. Using the process that plays this role, we might become destructive of ourselves or others. Actions (or inactions) taken when we engage in the process that plays this role are often regretted later. Usually, we are unaware of how to use the process that fills this role and feel like it just erupts and imposes itself rather unconsciously. Yet when we are open to the process that plays the devilish role, it becomes transformative. It gives us the impetus to create something new—to make lemonade out of lemons, rather than lament their sourness.

If I’m trying to get people to be silly and laugh does it seem a good way to target 7^th function?

Ti - I want to analyze the structure and placement of the fence.

I had to laugh.

Also, i think i know one ENTP who says i am funny (ENTPs have Ne Ti Fe Si, so Fi is their 7th) when i am myself. Even more so when i am serious. While he often takes me serious when i am silly. lol. I often have problems finding out if he is serious or not.

Cannot edit it, just wanted to say that this is of course purely theorethical. Still needs proof.

Oh, and I try as hard as possible not to be logical. Maybe that's why I'm so depressed?

Okay, that makes sense. The original subject I mean. When I was in school and they told us to write an outline so that we could then write our paper using the outline as it's foundation, I thought that was completely silly. Who needs to follow an outline and who could even create from something that is so... concrete? I would write the paper as it came to me and then make the stupid outline from the paper I'd written.

Silly outlines. Who needs em?

I like the descriptions of the functions on this site, personally ^_^

As an ENTP, I am here to abruptly state that any claims that logic is nonsense are nonsensical. Most of the examples you have provided rest on logical fallacies. I take this quote as an example:

Posted By TheJan on 04 Mar 2010 02:18 AM
Just now the strangest thing happend to me... it was like this:
I was sitting, a little depressed, in my room. Then i began to logically disrupt my problems - like "i cannot be another person than i am, so trying to be makes no sense", then i somehow i had to laugh, my mood lifted somehow, and now i don't even know what problems they were... Did the deceiver play a trick on me?

A big difference between Fi and Ti is the difference between thinking holistically and thinking specifically.

The first statement "I cannot be another person than I am" is clear common sense. It is what it is, matter of fact. An orange can not be what it is not. It is an orange.

The second statement "so trying to be makes no sense" is on an entirely different plane. Trying to be another person implies that you are trying to adopt the characteristics of someone else, or change your personality to fit theirs; not that you are attempting to defy common sense.

You're mixing things together. First your talking about logic, and then you're talking about personality. You established truth about one subject, and then attempted to carry it into another.

It doesn't work. Personality is variable.

Here's the paradox: If you try to be another person and succeed, you are now that person.