# Is it unhealthy (or even impossible) to develop shadow (unconscious) functions?



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

Apparently there are two schools of thoughts regarding the cognitive function development:


 It's not possible to develop shadow functions consciously (since they are the part of the unconscious of the psyche), and they only appear on the surface under extreme stress (i.e., when the inferior function fails to work in normal stress required for the activation of the _grip_). So, when someone says that they have developed a shadow function, they are simply emulating its use through their conscious functions. Thus, it's meaningless to try to develop those functions. I believe it's nearly an established opinion in the MBTI's community and many share it confidently (as if it's a fact) to discourage people who are into personal development stage and trying to develop a shadow function for their ego needs.
 
 It's possible, although it requires great energy (and even makes one neurotic in the process) to consciously develop shadow functions. Most often than not, a person might be forced to develop a certain skill-set that is usually associated with a particular function. So, one needs to first develop the conscious functions (from top to bottom), and only develops a shadow function for the minimum usage and not for over-usage (as it will weaken the conscious functions and tire the . Running by this theory, it's possible for an INFJ to become organized and efficient (i.e., not missing the deadlines) through the use of Te in the workplace, while enjoying the usage of the conscious functions in their personal activities. As far as I know, Socionics considers the 5th (ignoring) and 6th (demonstrative) strong, but devalued function, which might imply that they are easier to use when required for the individual as compared to 7th (role) and 8th (vulnerable) function which would be highly draining as it completely opposes the ego. There is an article in the socionics' website (unofficial) describing the ways to experience (consciously) all the functions.


There is a theory in Socionics on the vertical subtypes, wherein heavy tertiary might exchange the position of demonstrative and vulnerable, so an INFp-Ni (with boosted "Ti" channel) can have strong Te, but devalued, and he will resist Fi.

Interestingly enough, there are works by Jungian analysts (or enthusiasts) that focus solely on the functional development (including shadow functions). Few that I remember come from "Facets of Type: Activities to Develop the Type Preferences" and "Functions of Type: Activities to Develop the Eight Jungian Functions"

Basically, I am trying to develop Te as an INFJ to efficiently achieve my Ni goals, and I need a validation that I am in the right direction and not becoming "unhealthy". I believe, I've already developed Te to some degree (along with heavy Ti) by spending time with Te doms, and I am pretty comfortable debating with them, and achieving some goals (although I still get distracted a lot) efficiently (by considering the external measurement: time, deadlines, etc. and organizing my environment and writing), but it gives me headaches after sometime. However, I am not entirely sure if it's really Te or just Ti+Fe appearing as Te. At the same time, I really, really hate Fi, and its sentiments piss me off, thus my theory of shifting role function to demonstrative makes sense to me personally.

*[Can't post links due to insufficient post count]*


----------



## Another Lost Cause (Oct 6, 2015)

I believe I've somehow developed my F over time to some degree. I do sometimes have these frissons of empathy where I briefly sense I can perfectly feel the other person's emotions. It's rare for me to do that, but it's definitely not my T function doing that. I've heard similar stories of students struggling with a math concept, feeling absolutely hopeless about it, then out of nowhere comes this sudden understanding of it. That might be the T form of what I described earlier. Put someone in an environment enough where they have to use those functions, and they'll probably develop, just not in a way that can be easily consciously harnessed.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

Another Lost Cause said:


> I believe I've somehow developed my F over time to some degree. I do sometimes have these frissons of empathy where I briefly sense I can perfectly feel the other person's emotions. It's rare for me to do that, but it's definitely not my T function doing that. I've heard similar stories of students struggling with a math concept, feeling absolutely hopeless about it, then out of nowhere comes this sudden understanding of it. That might be the T form of what I described earlier. Put someone in an environment enough where they have to use those functions, and they'll probably develop, just not in a way that can be easily consciously harnessed.


You most likely have developed your inferior Fe over time, which is perfectly fine according to most models (i.e., tertiary and inferior develops normally as person ages). The question is: Could you able to develop shadow functions that are not in your normal (healthy) functional stack (i.e., Ni, Se, etc.) if you were put in an environment which encourages their usage? By shadow functions, I mean the functions that are beyond your inferior.


----------



## NomadLeviathan (Jun 21, 2015)

How can you adult without Si? I have a detail extensive job, and I've come a long way in developing introverted sensation.


----------



## Entropic (Jun 15, 2012)

I don't believe much in functional development in the first place; I only believe in that you can make more conscious use of a function and thus in a sense, develop your control and nuanced understanding of it. Due to egoic preference, the shadow functions are always painful to the ego so therefore it's a moot point trying to develop them as in letting them take control in the ego.


----------



## Amelia (Aug 23, 2015)

I view tertiary functions as functions that operate in your subconscious. They're not necessarily who you are, but they do affect your actions or thoughts to some extent. 

I have Si as a shadow/tertiary function. There are parts of me that detest the changing of traditions or change in general, but I don't operate solely off any of those subconscious thoughts. I typically welcome change because my adventurous Ne overrides it. I also credit my Si for my frequent references to my own past experiences.

So, yeah. After reading your post I'm pretty sure it is hard to develop, but it's definitely there, and it's not leaving.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

Amelia said:


> I view tertiary functions as functions that operate in your subconscious. They're not necessarily who you are, but they do affect your actions or thoughts to some extent.
> 
> I have Si as a shadow/tertiary function. There are parts of me that detest the changing of traditions or change in general, but I don't operate solely off any of those subconscious thoughts. I typically welcome change because my adventurous Ne overrides it. I also credit my Si for my frequent references to my own past experiences.
> 
> So, yeah. After reading your post I'm pretty sure it is hard to develop, but it's definitely there, and it's not leaving.


If you read my post, then you will realize that I am referring shadow functions to the functions beyond tertiary/inferior according to eight function model. Regarding the tertiary, depending on which function model you follow, it's unconscious, but a person gets conscious control over time once it gets differentiated/developed enough.


----------



## SalvinaZerelda (Aug 26, 2010)

Yeah, I don't hear people talk about those much.
There's a video floating around out there that we use all of the functions, which is kind of interesting..
but originally when I tried to develop those functions [Fe/Ti] I felt like it was impossible.
I find that they can look very similar and accomplish the same things, though.
Sometimes my Ne looks like Se. This was environmental.
Sometimes my Ne and/or Fi can look like Ni. That was developed and environmental. It felt like a natural progression.
Fi can do some of the same things Fe can [even if Fe types usually stand out as very different from Fi as a whole]


----------



## Jippa Jonken (Jul 20, 2015)

No. What is commonly called shadow functions are in fact the more balanced conflicts in the psyche. The dominant and inferior are the most dramatically disharmonic. The auxiliary and tertiary are slightly more balanced yet markedly split. The so-called shadow functions are more harmonized and the inverse of the dom/inf pair is balanced and united. This is my current understanding, at least. An example:

Te-dominant, Fi inferior
Fe and Ti are united. There is no conflict between these in the Te-dominant mind, there is no bias toward either pole. So it's not so much anything to develop at all.


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

seriousguy said:


> ...my theory of shifting role function to demonstrative makes sense to me personally.


I have been thinking about the same thing.

Most of the time my though process is in a circle of Ne-Ti and I understand most things through it. But people would probably see me as Fe or Te user when in a group setting. Its like role and demonstrative are a part of the same Je manipulation system I use to help people understand my point, since I noticed they arent interested in my hypothesizing of everything, although I do love expressing my Ne as any Ne dom, it gives me energy.
At the same time I try to think in terms of Ni or Si, meditation helps when making afforts. While Se and Fi seem to work as something I am bored with, uninterested and pulled away from.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

jkp said:


> ...While Se and Fi seem to work as something I am bored with, uninterested and pulled away from.


You still seem to have Fi and Se as role and vulnerable respectively (in your super-ego block), as you are getting _pulled _from them. Your desire for the people to understand your hypothetical ideas is probably coming from Fe, but you could be using Te to show them how your ideas fit with the practical usage or already established procedures. You already have Te as demonstrative in normal functional stack.


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

seriousguy said:


> You still seem to have Fi and Se as role and vulnerable respectively (in your super-ego block), as you are getting _pulled _from them. Your desire for the people to understand your hypothetical ideas is probably coming from Fe, but you could be using Te to show them how your ideas fit with the practical usage or already established procedures. You already have Te as demonstrative in normal functional stack.


Well put.

When I was reading your OP I got an idea in my head of the possibility of you being misstyped. I'm not saying you are or that you have to prove yourself. But I am interested in why you devalue Fi and want to value Te. Jung talked about shadows as something that you sometimes cant see in yourself but can see as negative behavior in others.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

jkp said:


> When I was reading your OP I got an idea in my head of the possibility of you being misstyped. I'm not saying you are or that you have to prove yourself. But I am interested in why you devalue Fi and want to value Te. Jung talked about shadows as something that you sometimes cant see in yourself but can see as negative behavior in others.


I am open to the possibility that I might be a different type, but it's highly unlikely, because I strongly relate to stereotypical descriptions of Ni and Jung's description of introverted intuitive type. INTJ (with auxiliary Te) is unlikely, because their demeanor is completely different. IxTJs that I've met IRL have very terse, to-the-point speech. Regarding why I devalue Fi and value Te:


 I am doing a major in software engineering, and have spent few years in programming / coding (usually about Libraries/APIs) forums before I entered the field. When I was learning a particular library for some programming language, I had a tendency to understand everything about it (like breaking its components, digging down and trying to understand how things are interconnected) and ask questions (often again and again) which pissed many people (who were actually professional software developers with good experience in the field) who reminded me that one shouldn't "reinvent the wheel" (which is often the mistake of the beginners, according to them) and do what works as per the requirements. For instance, if I had to decide between two graphics libraries, I would spend a lot of time analyzing which one is better and why when I've already read somewhere that library _a_ is better for _x_ and library _b_ is better for _y_. Period. Now after years, when I need to start a project, I quickly take the decision, set the deadline and complete the project from start to finish without over-analyzing. Note that I am not attributing this behavior exclusively to Te, but considering the fact that engineering prefers the empirical approach (and assuming Te = empiricism), it makes sense that Te users in engineering want to get shit done as quickly as possible. This doesn't mean that I actually value Te (as I still read things again and again obsessively), but I can use this stereotypical "get shit done through logical steps" attribute of Te under stress. But, again, it could be Fe+Ti or Ti+Se and not Te.


 Assuming the correlation between values and type, I value rationalism (Ti) over empiricism (Te), but I am intrigued when empiricists destroy the arguments of the rationalists with crystal clear confidence using objective facts that are in front of people. I've been inspired by writings / philosophy of empiricists (Aristotle, Richard Feynman, Carl Sagan, etc.) whose work implied how pure rationalism (i.e., considering something is "true" just because it makes sense to the subject rationally and follow the logical rules) can form delusional beliefs [There is no objective truth from nihilistic point of view... the idea that renders the critical thinking meaningless]


 On why I get irritated by Fi. I don't like when dominant Fi users (ISFP/INFP) do not listen to rational arguments and are attached to their ideals / beliefs too much that their whole life revolves around those ideals. They complain that I am doing philosophy and science when I am simply telling the rationale behind my views. My ENTJ friend likes debating with me, and although he is ruthless and believes he's always right, I don't get irritated by him. Many ISFPs I've met are too wishy-washy, and they seek my help, but they never follow a thing that I tell them.

Again, it's not that I dislike Fi and like Te, it's just I don't like certain aspects of Fi and like certain aspects of Te that I am trying to develop in myself. Perhaps my desire to get validation from the outside world comes from Te? I don't know.


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

@seriousguy

I see. So unlike most Fe users you devalue Fi as being to irrational and see practicality in Te. Have you looked at enneagram? Most F users are correlating to 4 or 2, you seem to be a 3 which could explain your unusual Te-Fi axis valuing.

Maybe this writings from Nietzsche help inspire your Te to the maximum potential.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_to_power


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

jkp said:


> @seriousguy
> 
> I see. So unlike most Fe users you devalue Fi as being to irrational and see practicality in Te. Have you looked at enneagram? Most F users are correlating to 4 or 2, you seem to be a 3 which could explain your unusual Te-Fi axis valuing.
> 
> ...


Lol, Nietzche. An INTJ who worshiped Se and made it out to be a quasi-spiritual value, redefining life as Se and relegating everything else to a supporting (and sometimes counterproductive) distraction at best. 

It's funny how people will sometimes develop complexes about their inferior function.


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

Zamyatin said:


> Lol, Nietzche. An INTJ who worshiped Se and made it out to be a quasi-spiritual value, redefining life as Se and relegating everything else to a supporting (and sometimes counterproductive) distraction at best.
> 
> It's funny how people will sometimes develop complexes about their inferior function.


When I talked to a girl that presumably studies Nietzsche, she explained that he did not consider himself to be an ubermensch but he thought people should be and some are like that. It does kind of seem he idolized his weaknesses.

Do you think his theories target mostly ENTJ, ESTJ, ESTP?


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

jkp said:


> When I talked to a girl that presumably studies Nietzsche, she explained that he did not consider himself to be an ubermensch but he thought people should be and some are like that. It does kind of seem he idolized his weaknesses.
> 
> Do you think his theories target mostly ENTJ, ESTJ, ESTP?


I think his theories mostly targeted himself. He seems to be one of those people who try to imagine "perfection" by imagining perfection as whatever they currently lack, and his lack of Se and ability to assert himself caused him to think Se and asserting one's self is perfection. Dual-seeking gone crazy, basically. His theories are very gamma though. Very biased towards valued Fi, Ni, Te and Se, with Se holding a primary position as the central part of life.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

jkp said:


> @seriousguy
> 
> I see. So unlike most Fe users you devalue Fi as being to irrational and see practicality in Te. Have you looked at enneagram? Most F users are correlating to 4 or 2, you seem to be a 3 which could explain your unusual Te-Fi axis valuing.


I am 5w4 sp/sx. Tritype is likely 5w4, 1w2, 4w5. I am not 3, but 5 and 1 belongs to "competent" triad, however, I don't see a reason why it would make me value Te.


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

seriousguy said:


> Many ISFPs I've met are too wishy-washy, and they seek my help, but they never follow a thing that I tell them.


I've never met an ISFP (or at least someone who uses Fi+Se cognition) who fits under the category of "wishy-washy"; that's primarily the realm of Ne-valuing feeler types. The most idealistic feelers, amusingly, are the Ni-Fe ones. Gandhi, MLK, Che Guevara... Hitler, etc.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

The_Wanderer said:


> I've never met an ISFP (or at least someone who uses Fi+Se cognition) who fits under the category of "wishy-washy"; that's primarily the realm of Ne-valuing feeler types. The most idealistic feelers, amusingly, are the Ni-Fe ones. Gandhi, MLK, Che Guevara... Hitler, etc.


Wishy-washy: not having or showing strong ideas or beliefs about something : weak and not able or not willing to act. Ne-valuing feeler types that I've met are very determined, passionate and often decisive. That's not to say all ISFPs are "wishy-washy", but the ones I've met can't take any decision on their own, and when they do, they take the most illogical decision, so they seek the external help, but they end up doing something reckless.


----------



## Zamyatin (Jun 10, 2014)

seriousguy said:


> Wishy-washy: not having or showing strong ideas or beliefs about something : weak and not able or not willing to act. Ne-valuing feeler types that I've met are very determined, passionate and often decisive. That's not to say all ISFPs are "wishy-washy", but the ones I've met can't take any decision on their own, and when they do, they take the most illogical decision, so they seek the external help, but they end up doing something reckless.


That doesn't sound like any ISFP I've ever met. They can be illogical, but they're almost always strong-willed. Are you sure you're not mistaking ISFJs for ISFPs?


----------



## The_Wanderer (Jun 13, 2013)

seriousguy said:


> Wishy-washy: not having or showing strong ideas or beliefs about something : weak and not able or not willing to act. Ne-valuing feeler types that I've met are very determined, passionate and often decisive. That's not to say all ISFPs are "wishy-washy", but the ones I've met can't take any decision on their own, and when they do, they take the most illogical decision, so they seek the external help, but they end up doing something reckless.


Decisiveness is _not_ an Ne trait... they're too busy going _what about this? how about that? what if we do this?_; too much value is placed on the _potentials_ for them to be decisive, and they often juggle conflicting ideas too much to be _passionate _about specific _ideals _(they're usually interested in _everything new_, which could be considered _passionate_ in a way). Se is all about taking action in the present moment, following impulses, instincts and using one's willpower and presence to impact situations. Fi is all about sussing people out and, especially, _knowing what you like and what you don't, which is part of why _ISFPs _aren't wishy-washy. _Did you get your cognitive function definitions from a serial box? Fi+Se is a pretty textbook definition of _not_ being a wishy-washy pushover. 

ISFJs often appear far more wishy-washy, but usually this has more to do with their sensitivity to positive emotional atmosphere; wanting to not cause conflict, to not cause waves and instead keep the peace.


----------



## reptilian (Aug 5, 2014)

seriousguy said:


> I am 5w4 sp/sx. Tritype is likely 5w4, 1w2, 4w5. I am not 3, but 5 and 1 belongs to "competent" triad, however, I don't see a reason why it would make me value Te.


Ehhh, idk... Felt a 3ish kind of vibe from you. As if you are here to improve, to improve means value Te, so other people will value your success.


----------



## seriousguy (Nov 27, 2015)

Zamyatin said:


> That doesn't sound like any ISFP I've ever met. They can be illogical, but they're almost always strong-willed. Are you sure you're not mistaking ISFJs for ISFPs?


I am pretty sure they are ISFPs. My brother is an ISFP, he is not very illogical, but very indecisive. The unhealthy ones are very dependent on others, and they get paranoid easily. For example, I have a lady friend who shares her experience with her boyfriend, and when something bad happens, she keeps asking questions to get my validation and not really understanding any logic. She is strong-willed, but indecisive (in terms of quick decision making) and can't take logical decisions. In the end, she does the exact opposite of what I tell her. But, I get your point that "strong-will" generally corresponds to Se, so they don't share this part of the wishy-washy description. I was conflating wishy-washy with feeling dominance in decision making.


----------

