idea on how to put the functions in order -> ego and shadow functions

i had this idea for how the function order list should be put out.

first of all i dont believe in that 8 function setup, it simply doesent make any sense after studying jungs work. imo what they call shadow function function in MBTI is actually your main functions working together. for ITP this "shadow Te" would actually be Ti and Fe used together, and because Ti tries to accommodate itself to external world through Fe, it creates this crippled way of thinking because Ti and Fe will kind of clash together.
Ti being the first function that defines ego for ITP is hard to let go to make room for Fe(jung has written quite alot about this, jung calls Fe the shadow function for Ti dom), so in order to use your shadow(Fe) in healthy way, it needs to make room for Ti ego or what comes out will be unhealthy thinking(jung talked about this also).
now then there is this factor on MBTI shadow functions, that when you are depressed or something, you start to use your (MBTI)shadow functions, for ITP it would start with Te, then go deeper into your shadow -> Ni(what i would hypothesize being Ne dominating in field of Si) -> Se(imo Si dominating, in field of Ne) -> Fi(Fe dominating in field of Ti). all of these steps in your (MBTI)shadow are basically steps into your Fe(jung shadow) and your shadow will work in unhealthy ways until you surrender part of your ego to pure Fe and stop trying to Ti what comes out of it.

jung only used 3 function set for types, dom, aux and inferior, but he talked about transcendent function. transcendent function basically the third function in MBTI function order and jung described it as having an a transformative quality to it(but the transcendent function is not all there is to third function, its more like just one function of the third function) that can lead you in your shadow(inferior function) in healthy way. but then there being shadow that must be handled properly(give room for it for your ego -> making room from your dom function as it clashes with it) in order to gain control over it and use it in healthy way.

there was an interesting article on the journal of analytical psychology(jungian psychology), called 'the third in the shadow of the fourth' ( PEP Web - The Third in the Shadow of the Fourth ) where Ann Belford Ulanov (jungian analyst) hypothesized that the third(transcendent/third function) is in the shadow of the fourth(shadow/inferior). after reading this and thinking how the dominant function might be hard to see, since its so much yourself, that its hard to see it apart of yourself(other functions) to notice how it works, because you have been using it all your life much and use it pretty much automatically. i have noticed that Si has same sort of effect on me, but its not because i use it automatically but consciously like Ti, but i use it automatically, but unconsciously.

now there is this factor of lower functions being more unconscious. dom function being most conscious. aux less conscious(more like subconscious(as in freudian subconscious(unconscious, but can be taken into conscious)), but coming more conscious as its developed). tert even more unconscious(imo something like formed unconsciously, but once the perceotion/judgment is formed, the formed stuff is subconscious). and inferior being the most unconscious, but once developed it starts to work more like tert function, but will fight the dom function as T and F will clash(ITP example), so what comes out of it, cannot be taken as facts, like stuff from other functions. that is unless you have had grip on your shadow(making room on ego for the inferior and inferior used as its pure form). tert wont clash with the aux function, simply because aux has to be confirmed by the dom function to be taken seriously -> there is more "room" in your "self" for your tert than for your inferior.

i suggest separating the unconscious self from the conscious self.
if we would arrange the INTP functions like this:
conscious -> Ti, Ne, Si, Fe <- unconscious
we would see Si being behind Fe, if you look at this from the point of view of the unconscious. for the unconscious self(functions backwards) Fe would be the strongest function, kinda like dom shadow function, Si being the aux shadow function.
-> the third being in the shadow of the fourth

but because these lower function(Si and Fe for INTP) can be taken into the conscious, i suggest calling them shadow functions. even tho third isnt your shadow according to jung, but its a way to your shadow(inferior), it has same type of negative qualities than inferior if its not developed/handled well and because it is in the shadow of the fourth from your unconscious point of view, i think it would be fair to call it your dominant shadow function.

in conclusion i think it would give more understanding about jungian typology if the dom and aux functions should be called Ego functions and Tert and inferior as Shadow functions. and this would guide new people for understanding some of the fundamentals of jungian typology and not leave important stuff out like MBTI does. this way newbie trying to understand what this function order is about, he could just ask what are these ego and shadow functions and it could be easily explained to him -> he would get far more understanding of this whole system than just seeing first, second, third and fourth function.

so INTP would be
Ego functions:
Ti
Ne
Shadow functions:
Si
Fe

what do you guys think about this?

I would love to see an example of this. In a way it reminds me of Beebe's: "the dom and aux" merely reflect to create everything else.

I like what you say about only the 4 functions being relevant, in that our other 4 are so warped taht they actually end up as a clash of two of.. something else. I'm not quite clear yet, but Syndicat wrote something that I think might be similar to this small part of what you wrote.

"Irrational Function Imitation:
- Fi works as individual values, but, along with Te, create common values. They create the essence of Fe; the illusion of Fe. In other words, Fi and Te together becomes a common understanding (Fe) to the representative.
- Fe works as common values, but, along with Ti, create individual values. They create the essence of Fi; the illusion of Fi. In other words, Fe and Ti together becomes an individual understanding (Fi) to the representative.
- Ti works as individualistic facts, but along with Fe, create common facts. They create the essence of Te; the illusion of Te. In other words, Ti and Fe together becomes a common understanding (Te) to the representative.
- Te works as common facts, but along with Fi, create individual facts. They create the essence of Ti; the illusion of Ti. In other words, Te and Fi together becomes an individual understanding (Ti) to the representative."

This just sounds like teamtechnology's take on the functions, where the type with the four functions in reverse (or all letters opposite) is the "shadow type' that manifests under stress. Myers Briggs Personality Types

The key to understanding the eight function model is to think first of the four functions separate from the attitudes. So you don't have to mix Ti+Fe to get Te. Dominant T is normally introverted, while inferior Feeling is extraverted. The ego backs up its dominant perspective (in this case, Thinking) by turning it to the opposite orientation sometimes (where it usually engages iNtuition or Feeling).

Originally Posted by Eric B

This just sounds like teamtechnology's take on the functions, where the type with the four functions in reverse (or all letters opposite) is the "shadow type' that manifests under stress. Myers Briggs Personality Types

The key to understanding the eight function model is to think first of the four functions separate from the attitudes. So you don't have to mix Ti+Fe to get Te. Dominant T is normally introverted, while inferior Feeling is extraverted. The ego backs up its dominant perspective (in this case, Thinking) by turning it to the opposite orientation sometimes (where it usually engages iNtuition or Feeling).

but the deal is that when you are using Ti + Fe, it doesent turn to Fi, this isnt mathematics. i have experienced this Ti + Fe thing myself pretty hard and i even scored high Fi at that time from single function test. but after i introspected on it and tried to understand my thinking with this thing for a long time, i noticed that it was simply me trying to consciously make sense for what my Fe was telling me. i first thought it was Fi that i was using on it, because i thought this 8 function theory was true back then. but it was like, you know when you as an INTP kinda have to check your Ne with your Ti, at least most the times? well it was the same but it required much more Ti check and it wouldnt make sense easily as T and F clashes. but you know Fi is sort of making decisions by weighting worth of stuff by putting a value on them? well this Ti + Fe thing isnt about that, its about pure Ti, but the Ti is restricted on the field of Fe. and because this Ti + Fe isnt about weighting the worth of things by putting a value to them, its invalid to call it Fi, it might look like a Fi, but its missing the fundamentals of what makes the Fi.
so the orientation of inferior function doesent change, its just that you use your dom function in the field of the inferior.

and
Lexicon of Jungian Terms | New York Association for Analytical Psychology

Shadow
Hidden or unconscious aspects of oneself, both good and bad, which the ego has either repressed or never recognized. (See also repression.)


-The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. ["The Shadow," CW 9ii, par. 14.]

Before unconscious contents have been differentiated, the shadow is in effect the whole of the unconscious. It is commonly personified in dreams by persons of the same sex as the dreamer.

-Although, with insight and good will, the shadow can to some extent be assimilated into the conscious personality, experience shows that there are certain features which offer the most obstinate resistance to moral control and prove almost impossible to influence. These resistances are usually bound up with projections, which are not recognized as such, and their recognition is a moral achievement beyond the ordinary. While some traits peculiar to the shadow can be recognized without too much difficulty as one’s personal qualities, in this case both insight and good will are unavailing because the cause of the emotion appears to lie, beyond all possibility of doubt, in the other person.[Ibid., par. 16.]

The realization of the shadow is inhibited by the persona. To the degree that we identify with a bright persona, the shadow is correspondingly dark. Thus shadow and persona stand in a compensatory relationship, and the conflict between them is invariably present in an outbreak of neurosis. The characteristic depression at such times indicates the need to realize that one is not all one pretends or wishes to be.

There is no generally effective technique for assimilating the shadow. It is more like diplomacy or statesmanship and it is always an individual matter. First one has to accept and take seriously the existence of the shadow. Second, one has to become aware of its qualities and intentions. This happens through conscientious attention to moods, fantasies and impulses. Third, a long process of negotiation is unavoidable.

-It is a therapeutic necessity, indeed, the first requisite of any thorough psychological method, for consciousness to confront its shadow. In the end this must lead to some kind of union, even though the union consists at first in an open conflict, and often remains so for a long time. It is a struggle that cannot be abolished by rational means. When it is willfully repressed it continues in the unconscious and merely expresses itself indirectly and all the more dangerously, so no advantage is gained. The struggle goes on until the opponents run out of breath. What the outcome will be can never be seen in advance. The only certain thing is that both parties will be changed.["Rex and Regina," CW 14, par. 514.]

-This process of coming to terms with the Other in us is well worth while, because in this way we get to know aspects of our nature which we would not allow anybody else to show us and which we ourselves would never have admitted.["The Conjunction," ibid., par. 706.]

Responsibility for the shadow rests with the ego. That is why the shadow is a moral problem. It is one thing to realize what it looks like-what we are capable of. It is quite something else to determine what we can live out, or with.

-Confrontation with the shadow produces at first a dead balance, a standstill that hampers moral decisions and makes convictions ineffective or even impossible. Everything becomes doubtful.[Ibid., par. 708.]

The shadow is not, however, only the dark underside of the personality. It also consists of instincts, abilities and positive moral qualities that have long been buried or never been conscious.

-The shadow is merely somewhat inferior, primitive, unadapted, and awkward; not wholly bad. It even contains childish or primitive qualities which would in a way vitalize and embellish human existence, but-convention forbids!["Psychology and Religion," CW 11, par. 134.]

An outbreak of neurosis constellates both sides of the shadow: those qualities and activities one is not proud of, and new possibilities one never knew were there.

and
Lexicon of Jungian Terms | New York Association for Analytical Psychology

Inferior function
The least differentiated of the four psychological functions. (Compare primary function.)


-The inferior function is practically identical with the dark side of the human personality.["Concerning Rebirth," CW 9i, par. 222.]

In Jung’s model of typology, the inferior or fourth function is opposite to the superior or primary function. Whether it operates in an introverted or extraverted way, it behaves like an autonomous complex; its activation is marked by affect and it resists integration.

-The inferior function secretly and mischievously influences the superior function most of all, just as the latter represses the former most strongly.["The Phenomenology of the Spirit in Fairytales," ibid., par. 431.]

-Positive as well as negative occurrences can constellate the inferior counter-function. When this happens, sensitiveness appears. Sensi-tiveness is a sure sign of of the presence of inferiority. This provides the psychological basis for discord and misunderstanding, not only as between two people, but also in ourselves. The essence of the inferior function is autonomy: it is independent, it attacks, it fascinates and so spins us about that we are no longer masters of ourselves and can no longer rightly distinguish between ourselves and others["The Problem of the Attitude-Type," CW 7, par. 85.]

The inferior function is always of the same nature, rational or irrational, as the primary function: when thinking is most developed, the other rational function, feeling, is inferior; if sensation is dominant, then intuition, the other irrational function, is the fourth function, and so on. This accords with general experience: the thinker is tripped up by feeling values; the practical sensation type gets into a rut, blind to the possibilities seen by intuition; the feeling type is deaf to logical thinking; and the intuitive, at home in the inner world, runs afoul of concrete reality.

One may be aware of the perceptions or judgments associated with the inferior function, but these are generally over-ridden by the superior function. Thinking types, for example, do not give their feelings much weight. Sensation types have intuitions, but they are not motivated by them. Similarly, feeling types brush away disturbing thoughts and intuitives ignore what is right in front of them.

-Although the inferior function may be conscious as a phenomenon its true significance nevertheless remains unrecognized. It behaves like many repressed or insufficiently appreciated contents, which are partly conscious and partly unconscious . . . . Thus in normal cases the inferior function remains conscious, at least in its effects; but in a neurosis it sinks wholly or in part into the unconscious. ["Definitions," CW 6, par. 764.]

To the extent that a person functions too one-sidedly, the inferior function becomes correspondingly primitive and troublesome. The overly dominant primary function takes energy away from the inferior function, which falls into the unconscious. There it is prone to be activated in an unnatural way, giving rise to infantile desires and other symptoms of imbalance. This is the situation in neurosis.

-In order to extricate the inferior function from the unconscious by analysis, the unconscious fantasy formations that have now been activated must be brought to the surface. The conscious realization of these fantasies brings the inferior function to consciousness and makes further development possible.[Ibid., par. 764.]

When it becomes desirable or necessary to develop the inferior function, this can only happen gradually.

-I have frequently observed how an analyst, confronted with a terrific thinking type, for instance, will do his utmost to develop the feeling function directly out of the unconscious. Such an attempt is foredoomed to failure, because it involves too great a violation of the conscious standpoint. Should the violation nevertheless be successful, a really compulsive dependence of the patient on the analyst ensues, a transference that can only be brutally terminated, because, having been left without a standpoint, the patient has made his standpoint the analyst. . . . [Therefore] in order to cushion the impact of the unconscious, an irrational type needs a stronger development of the rational auxiliary function present in consciousness [and vice versa].["General Description of the Types," ibid., par. 670.]

Attempts to assimilate the inferior function are usually accompanied by a deterioration in the primary function. The thinking type can’t write an essay, the sensation type gets lost and forgets appointments, the intuitive loses touch with possibilities, and the feeling type can’t decide what something’s worth.

-And yet it is necessary for the development of character that we should allow the other side, the inferior function, to find expression. We cannot in the long run allow one part of our personality to be cared for symbiotically by another; for the moment when we might have need of the other function may come at any time and find us unprepared. ["The Problem of the Attitude-Type," CW 7, par. 86.]

Originally Posted by Souled In

I would love to see an example of this. In a way it reminds me of Beebe's: "the dom and aux" merely reflect to create everything else.

I like what you say about only the 4 functions being relevant, in that our other 4 are so warped taht they actually end up as a clash of two of.. something else. I'm not quite clear yet, but Syndicat wrote something that I think might be similar to this small part of what you wrote.

"Irrational Function Imitation:
- Fi works as individual values, but, along with Te, create common values. They create the essence of Fe; the illusion of Fe. In other words, Fi and Te together becomes a common understanding (Fe) to the representative.
- Fe works as common values, but, along with Ti, create individual values. They create the essence of Fi; the illusion of Fi. In other words, Fe and Ti together becomes an individual understanding (Fi) to the representative.
- Ti works as individualistic facts, but along with Fe, create common facts. They create the essence of Te; the illusion of Te. In other words, Ti and Fe together becomes a common understanding (Te) to the representative.
- Te works as common facts, but along with Fi, create individual facts. They create the essence of Ti; the illusion of Ti. In other words, Te and Fi together becomes an individual understanding (Ti) to the representative."

what sort of example are you talking about?

im not saying that the four functions are only ones that are relevant, im saying that the four functions are all functions you actually use. like syndicat said in that quote. its the illusion of Fe that comes from Fi + Te, imo its not Fe that is formed tho, its just an illusion of Fe because Te is working in the field of Fi.

Something like this:


the Te working in the field of Fi, works as the illusionary Fe. it gets the orientation of the more dominant function because because you are using it more, in this case it could be ETJ using Te in the limits of Fi. the illusion of Fe comes because this sort of usage of Te is limited to Fi values. it may seem like Fe because you are restricted to F when using Te. naturally normal usage of Te can happen to someone who is experiencing this illusionary Fe, but on other thoughts. when you are thinking about something that is causing this illusionary Fe, its only Te working in the field of Fi, because inferior Fi is what is causing this particular problem that you are trying to figure out.

the way out of this is trying to stop restricting the Fi with Te and let the Fi have some room in your 'self', even if its out of the normal Te heavy 'self'

Originally Posted by Souled In

I would love to see an example of this. In a way it reminds me of Beebe's: "the dom and aux" merely reflect to create everything else.

I like what you say about only the 4 functions being relevant, in that our other 4 are so warped taht they actually end up as a clash of two of.. something else. I'm not quite clear yet, but Syndicat wrote something that I think might be similar to this small part of what you wrote.

"Irrational Function Imitation:
- Fi works as individual values, but, along with Te, create common values. They create the essence of Fe; the illusion of Fe. In other words, Fi and Te together becomes a common understanding (Fe) to the representative.
- Fe works as common values, but, along with Ti, create individual values. They create the essence of Fi; the illusion of Fi. In other words, Fe and Ti together becomes an individual understanding (Fi) to the representative.
- Ti works as individualistic facts, but along with Fe, create common facts. They create the essence of Te; the illusion of Te. In other words, Ti and Fe together becomes a common understanding (Te) to the representative.
- Te works as common facts, but along with Fi, create individual facts. They create the essence of Ti; the illusion of Ti. In other words, Te and Fi together becomes an individual understanding (Ti) to the representative."

Problem with this interpretation is that since the functions can imitate each other, there's no telling who really uses what. By this system, any set of functions would yield basically the same kind of person. I could just as well say I'm ENFJ, since Ti and Fe together create Te and Fi.

Originally Posted by Naama

but the deal is that when you are using Ti + Fe, it doesent turn to Fi, this isnt mathematics. i have experienced this Ti + Fe thing myself pretty hard and i even scored high Fi at that time from single function test. but after i introspected on it and tried to understand my thinking with this thing for a long time, i noticed that it was simply me trying to consciously make sense for what my Fe was telling me. i first thought it was Fi that i was using on it, because i thought this 8 function theory was true back then. but it was like, you know when you as an INTP kinda have to check your Ne with your Ti, at least most the times? well it was the same but it required much more Ti check and it wouldnt make sense easily as T and F clashes. but you know Fi is sort of making decisions by weighting worth of stuff by putting a value on them? well this Ti + Fe thing isnt about that, its about pure Ti, but the Ti is restricted on the field of Fe. and because this Ti + Fe isnt about weighting the worth of things by putting a value to them, its invalid to call it Fi, it might look like a Fi, but its missing the fundamentals of what makes the Fi.
so the orientation of inferior function doesent change, its just that you use your dom function in the field of the inferior.

and
Lexicon of Jungian Terms | New York Association for Analytical Psychology

The problem starts from treating the eight function-attitudes as hard gears we shift between, as well as some bad definitions that have become widespread.
Like "Fe tells me" is not really accurate (though we all may slip and use stuff like this at times. It's a convenient shorthand, as is "using" a function).

The functions are senses of meaning that interpret the data we are processing. We can interpret the data coming in as tangible ("concrete") or conceptual ("abstract") elements, and we can judge it through a technical (impersonal) or humane ("personal") aspect.
And the "attitude" is simply the internal or external orientation we draw from.

So Fi is not simply "placing a value" on something. It's the ego that places value, through emotions. Again, the functions interpret these emotional reactions, so any function can be connected with something the ego places value on.
Fi is simply personally [i.e. the humane aspect] relating to a situation [emergent variables via one's own internal standard]. The humane nature of this often addresses "value" and "emotions" more, but that's not what the function really is.

Fe on the other hand measures our relationships by an external [set] standard of behavior [humane]
Ti is about the essential dynamics [technical aspect] of a situation related to our intended effect [emergent variables via one's own internal standard]

So what we're calling "the eight functions" are really combinations of the four functions with the two orientations. The whole thing behind "the shadow" is that the ego chooses certain of these functions in one or the other orientation, and suppresses the opposite. So it will often come up in a rash manner, unconsciously.
It's that "dark part of us" as the quotes mentions, that contains the archetypal complexes that interpret our emotional reactions through the rejected function attitudes. That's what we mean when we speak of those "other four" of the eight.

As for the second quote, the inferior is the most suppressed, and thus associated with the shadow, but that is simply where the ego structure places the function opposite the dominant combined with the attitude opposite the dominant. The other combinations, such as the opposite function in the dominant orientation and the dominant function in the opposite orientation are then not compatible with the ego, and are thus also in this unconscious region, but even deeper. Hence, why they get placed as "#5-8". This is why the inferior, or anima/animus is often called "the bridge" to the unconscious!

So it's not a matter of combining Xe + Yi to get Xi (whether your suggesting that or disclaiming it), or otherwise trying to explain the "actions" of one set of four function-attitudes by the other four. Four function + attitude combinations are ego-compatible, and the other four are not.

Originally Posted by Eric B

The problem starts from treating the eight function-attitudes as hard gears we shift between, as well as some bad definitions that have become widespread.
Like "Fe tells me" is not really accurate (though we all may slip and use stuff like this at times. It's a convenient shorthand, as is "using" a function).

The functions are senses of meaning that interpret the data we are processing. We can interpret the data coming in as tangible ("concrete") or conceptual ("abstract") elements, and we can judge it through a technical (impersonal) or humane ("personal") aspect.
And the "attitude" is simply the internal or external orientation we draw from.

So Fi is not simply "placing a value" on something. It's the ego that places value, through emotions. Again, the functions interpret these emotional reactions, so any function can be connected with something the ego places value on.
Fi is simply personally [i.e. the humane aspect] relating to a situation [emergent variables via one's own internal standard]. The humane nature of this often addresses "value" and "emotions" more, but that's not what the function really is.

Fe on the other hand measures our relationships by an external [set] standard of behavior [humane]
Ti is about the essential dynamics [technical aspect] of a situation related to our intended effect [emergent variables via one's own internal standard]

So what we're calling "the eight functions" are really combinations of the four functions with the two orientations. The whole thing behind "the shadow" is that the ego chooses certain of these functions in one or the other orientation, and suppresses the opposite. So it will often come up in a rash manner, unconsciously.
It's that "dark part of us" as the quotes mentions, that contains the archetypal complexes that interpret our emotional reactions through the rejected function attitudes. That's what we mean when we speak of those "other four" of the eight.

As for the second quote, the inferior is the most suppressed, and thus associated with the shadow, but that is simply where the ego structure places the function opposite the dominant combined with the attitude opposite the dominant. The other combinations, such as the opposite function in the dominant orientation and the dominant function in the opposite orientation are then not compatible with the ego, and are thus also in this unconscious region, but even deeper. Hence, why they get placed as "#5-8". This is why the inferior, or anima/animus is often called "the bridge" to the unconscious!

So it's not a matter of combining Xe + Yi to get Xi (whether your suggesting that or disclaiming it), or otherwise trying to explain the "actions" of one set of four function-attitudes by the other four. Four function + attitude combinations are ego-compatible, and the other four are not.

the problem with this is that its not jung, its your interpretation of someones interpretation of jung, that has been modified(MBTI/whatever). also, you just say things that you seem to consider as facts, but you dont give any reasoning or quotes to support them.

where did you get this idea of the shadow? are you talking about jungian shadow or mbti shadow?

Originally Posted by NiDBiLD

Problem with this interpretation is that since the functions can imitate each other, there's no telling who really uses what. By this system, any set of functions would yield basically the same kind of person. I could just as well say I'm ENFJ, since Ti and Fe together create Te and Fi.

Check this out when you get a chance, scroll down to Monkey Fritz's response.
T vs. F diff- lookin for debate and I'm bringin Da Fire!

As far as how shadow functions interact, perhaps we can look at it from the perspective in the above thread.