Rethinking Typological Functions: Toward a Structural Account of Typology and Intelligence

Contemporary interpretations of Jungian typological functions are often shaped by trait-based and cognitive or rationalist models. This paper argues that philosophical evaluation and reconstruction of typological theory are required. Drawing on distinctions from metaphysics—particularly between nominalism and realism and between bundle and substrate theories—this paper analyses how different interpretations of typological function are constructed and where their limitations arise. It shows that certain approaches collapse into nominalism by attributing shared features that do not obtain across their intended scope, while others fall into realist reification by treating functions as underlying entities. Even accounts that capture real patterns often remain bundle-like, describing co-occurring features without explaining reasons for their unity, or substrate-like, positing metaphysical identity where only structural similarity recurs. This account is further articulated through a structural analysis of signifying processes inspired by Lacanian theory, showing how functions can be understood as different modes of signifier chains. Applying the conceptual discussion to artificial intelligence, the paper argues that a clearer typological conception can inform how typology can better benefit artificial intelligence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Philosophies
Published
2026-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies11030099
Primary Topic
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Rethinking Typological Functions: Toward a Structural Account of Typology and Intelligence

Zijian Ding
Philosophies
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
article

Rethinking Typological Functions: Toward a Structural Account of Typology and Intelligence

Zijian Ding
article en

Abstract

Contemporary interpretations of Jungian typological functions are often shaped by trait-based and cognitive or rationalist models. This paper argues that philosophical evaluation and reconstruction of typological theory are required. Drawing on distinctions from metaphysics—particularly between nominalism and realism and between bundle and substrate theories—this paper analyses how different interpretations of typological function are constructed and where their limitations arise. It shows that certain approaches collapse into nominalism by attributing shared features that do not obtain across their intended scope, while others fall into realist reification by treating functions as underlying entities. Even accounts that capture real patterns often remain bundle-like, describing co-occurring features without explaining reasons for their unity, or substrate-like, positing metaphysical identity where only structural similarity recurs. This account is further articulated through a structural analysis of signifying processes inspired by Lacanian theory, showing how functions can be understood as different modes of signifier chains. Applying the conceptual discussion to artificial intelligence, the paper argues that a clearer typological conception can inform how typology can better benefit artificial intelligence.

PhilosophiesVol. 11(3)
University of Edinburgh (GB)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Philosophy and Theoretical Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.