Cognition as Syllogistic Relational Architecture: Why Jung Was Right About Types But Wrong About Functions

We demonstrate that personality type differences reduce to three orthogonal architectural dimensions in a syllogistic reasoning system implemented via relational database operations: (1) Premise orientation (Grand vs Small), (2) Row cardinality regime (Multi-row vs Single-row), and (3) Integrity constraint type (Entity vs Referential). This framework—the Syllogistic Relational Architecture (SRA)—subsumes all valid observations from Jungian typology while eliminating its phenomenological vagueness, shadow function mythology, and stack hierarchy metaphysics. We systematically refute: the 4-function stack model, the 8-function stack model, tertiary function "loops", inferior function "grips", socionics intertype relations, and function-attitude test batteries. What remains is computationally precise: cognition is relational-algebra-based syllogism implemented in a premise-based relational architecture, and type is architectural bias in premise processing. The eight Jungian "functions" are revealed as surrogate constructs—descriptive labels for regime variants of four underlying premise-integrity combinations. This demolition preserves Jung's empirical observations (16 stable patterns, functional differentiation, stress phenomena) while replacing his theoretical framework with mechanistic specification grounded in formal logic and database theory. The result transforms personality typology from descriptive taxonomy to falsifiable computational architecture.