Personality Cafe banner

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

14K views 29 replies 16 participants last post by  wanderquietly 
#1 ·
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?
 
See less See more
#2 ·
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."
 
#6 ·
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'
 
#3 ·
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).
 
#4 ·
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.
 
#5 ·
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.]
 
#12 ·
They are both models on psychology. No model is ever 100% accurate in what it tries to represent. So if you have two different models of the same thing, their usefulness comes from the fact that they give you two different perspectives to play with. If you believe that Jungs model is beyond improvement or reinterpretation you are making him a god. To me Jungs model is the most useful when you want to keep it short and simple. The eight function approach is best when you want to drill down to the core and want more shades of grey in your approach. Debating labels is pointless. Since I can call a banana, coffee and have it be a useful interpretation to me, even though it would trip everyone else up.
 
#15 ·
They are both models on psychology. No model is ever 100% accurate in what it tries to represent. So if you have two different models of the same thing, their usefulness comes from the fact that they give you two different perspectives to play with. If you believe that Jungs model is beyond improvement or reinterpretation you are making him a god. To me Jungs model is the most useful when you want to keep it short and simple. The eight function approach is best when you want to drill down to the core and want more shades of grey in your approach. Debating labels is pointless. Since I can call a banana, coffee and have it be a useful interpretation to me, even though it would trip everyone else up.
That picture in your sig rocks.
 
#16 ·
I agree with the part where you say the two main functions should fall into the freud model as the ego. I have always thought this is true. I would like to point out if that were true it would make shadow functions the Id. The idea that you present about the shadow functions being combinations of the dominate functions and a faulty interaction with the inferior functions is new to me. It makes sense that even your raw Id functions get processed through your ego. I would like to add another Idea. I think that the two dominate functions of the brain might belong one each primarily in one half of the brain. One function for thinking broadly and one function for thinking narrowly. F function and N function are for thinking broadly and T and s for thinking specifically. But this might prove the MBTI model to be slightly inaccurate because if we assume every person uses both sides of their brain what about those whose to dominate functions are s and t or n and f. Is their other part of their brain just almost never used or is the model wrong?
 
#20 ·
I would like to add another Idea. I think that the two dominate functions of the brain might belong one each primarily in one half of the brain. One function for thinking broadly and one function for thinking narrowly. F function and N function are for thinking broadly and T and s for thinking specifically. But this might prove the MBTI model to be slightly inaccurate because if we assume every person uses both sides of their brain what about those whose to dominate functions are s and t or n and f. Is their other part of their brain just almost never used or is the model wrong?
I sort-of agree with this myself. Except I think N and T are left brain and S and F are right brain. But N and F are more broad and S and T more narrow, that is true. But the left brain can be broad, and the right brain narrow.
 
#19 ·
I disagree with the entire hierarchy. I think people need to feel free to question this whole set-up and its premises.

To begin with, the way MBTI traditionally determines dominant function has nothing to do with Jung. Myers and Briggs set up the J/P polarity with the purpose of determining dominant function. But the J/P polarity in reality has nothing to do with this. It is a valid polarity in its own right. It is basic yin/yang, left/right brain. Dominant functions are determined using the assumption that J/P has to do with extraversion. But it doesn't. P or unscheduled, unplanned activities can happen with other people, or alone; in the world or in your mind. Same with J, scheduled and planned/orderly activities. So there is no connection between J/P and which function is dominant.
We each have two dominant functions, the ones in our type. Which one is more dominant than the other, is probably the higher-scoring one. But there's no way to set up a valid hierarchy using MBTI. If you are close between T and F, for example, one or two different answers to the test, and your dominant function becomes your most inferior one.
If you are an extravert, then you tend to use all your functions in an extraverted way more than introverted. I don't think there's a hierarchy that says if I am an introverted thinker, I must therefore be an extraverted feeler. MBTI gets too systematic and far removed from reality with these distinctions.
 
#21 ·
Post was great. It makes one rethink mbti and jungian system. I kind of agree with lot of things like tert and infer func considered as subconscious as they are kind of intermediate between dom and shadow, specially infer.
However, it asserts that we are only 1/4 self actualized, its kinda scary, but true.
I am actually also skeptic about how functions are arranged in extroverted and introverted manner, like
For dominant Ti, Te becomes their shadow function, whereas, Fe is considered inferior, but more accessible than Te for Dom Ti.
Though I don't consider myself expert on it, I realize that thinking is more of a comfortable zone for dom Ti, whether its Ti or Te, rather than Fe and same with the other don functions.
I would like to have suggestions.
 
#22 ·
I think its cool that our functions blend together to respond to the environment. Now that I see this my world makes a lot more sense. I always wondered why odd thoughts of principles would pop into my head while stressed. I'm a dominant Fe with a bottom cognitive function of Ti creating Si when combined. I'm an Enfj; I don't usually think of the authenticity of someone since it doesn't affect the harmony I seek but under stressful times I see myself lash out others for wrong-doing. It baffled me because I'm normally so tolerate of others I don't notice short comings of others. It makes sense that I would start to pass moral judgment while under stress. Its Si being present through Fe and Ti.
 
#23 ·
the 8 function model makes more sense. no human being is completely Fe. no human being absolutely prefers Fe to Fi.

ENTP is not
Ne Ti Fe Si
but
Ne Ti Fe Si Ni Te Fi Se

different levels of preference.

although we can use Ti and Fe to create Fi, it's not to say we don't have SOME Fi innately within us that we can learn to access and develop ever frequent pathways toward.
 
#24 ·
Ti and Fe to create Fi
This doesn't really happen with functions, even though the illusion sort of exists. For instance, as an Ni dom, Ni and Se might occasionally make a person look like they're using Si, but honestly, I really don't consciously use Si much at all (preferring to think from the perspective of past experiences - ugh, that's definitely not me - I think under extreme stress, demonic Si comes out, but its often absolutely negative detail memories or detail memories of a past aesthetic that make me feel like I'm reliving the experience that I have little to no positive emotional investment in - I only really consciously use it sometimes to try to confirm something negative that happened to me - the context in which I use it is pretty much never positive, which fits with what the 8 function models propose as it being part of the "demonic complex"). It's actually my Ni deriving answers to something I observe that may make me look like I have a database of knowledge in my head of the Si variety, but, in fact, I don't at all - instead, my Ni made inferences based on something I observed. The whole idea of reliving the past moments associated with present ones while experiencing something or thinking about something, such as watching movies and feeling the same way you did in the past (in terms of sensual perception), is absolutely obnoxious to me. I've experienced it a few times, but, as I said before, the context is always negative and makes me feel like...ew, just weird to be experiencing a past mental state...in fact, quite nightmarish, like I'm helpless.
 
#25 ·
Also, the example of Ti+Fe = Fi would completely defeat the point of the functions being different "perspectives." They're all different perspectives of relating oneself to the world or relating the world to you.
 
#27 ·
Wow! This is so awesome I need a day to ingest it properly. I think I will have much to say and ask. Thank you again for this.
 
#28 ·
...
so INTP would be
Ego functions:
Ti
Ne
Shadow functions:
Si
Fe

what do you guys think about this?
Sounds ok, but I'd still refer to the first two as "Conscious Functions" and the second two as "Subconscious Functions" since Ego and Shadow already have a meaning with the 8 function believers, and we should make it easy to be clear which theory you subscribe to.

My Fi expresses itself by motivating me to do things, such as checking and rechecking my work, rather than be fast and deal with the consequences later. Se is still something I'm trying to understand, but I think it's why I'm focused on the present and my immediate surroundings much more than my friends with Si in any of their top four functions. So I'd say these functions are still much, much more dominant than the last four functions (in the 8 function system). I don't use Ne, Ti, Fe or Si very much at all. In fact, if I make a judgement based on what others are feeling, or what other feelings might exist (I think that's how Fe works), it's almost always because I want to avoid responses that might make me feel bad. Likewise, I'm not very confident in my own thoughts (Ti) because I prefer to base my logical decisions on evidence gathered and other peoples' logic.

I'm basing these statements on the following definitions and theses:
Feeling - a judgement function which uses emotion as the major guideline
Thinking - a judgement function which uses logic as the major guideline
iNtuition - a perceiving function which uses the imagination and unconscious
Sensing -a perceiving function which uses the five senses

I'm assuming that introverted and extroverted qualities, when applied to the functions, are a sort of attitude given to the function.

The introverted attitude tends to be subjective and focus deeply on a subject, rather than broadly.
The extroverted attitude tends to be objective and focus broadly on a subject (or many subjects), rather than deeply.

I hope this helps the discussion. There seems to be a lot of argument about the nature of Fi, Fe, Ti and Te.
 
#29 ·
Sounds ok, but I'd still refer to the first two as "Conscious Functions" and the second two as "Subconscious Functions" since Ego and Shadow already have a meaning with the 8 function believers, and we should make it easy to be clear which theory you subscribe to.
The official terms are "preferred" and "non-preferred". (The shadows are technically "non-preferred" too, but the concept of "preference" really starts with the four-function model (S, N, T, F), so the shadows simply parallel preferred and nonpreferred).

"Sub-conscious" isn't really good, for consciousness changes (grows, hopefully) as we get older, so it will not always be a hard division of 1,2: "conscious"; 3,4: "less than conscious".
Alternate terms I have come up with that convey the level of consciousness to a certain extent are "mature" and "immature".
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top