# What if I told you, I developed the Shadow Functions?



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

I believe I have developed all eight functions, and have tamed the four shadow functions.
The shadows are all consciously accessible, not discomforting or stressful, and they were all worth putting myself through hell to get.

Essentially when someone finds out how to consciously tap into a shadow function, they have opened a floodgate that is now impossible to close back up.
The effect is extreme distress and overwhelming discomfort. 

You have access to this almost new point-of-view, and are flooded with raw data from it, but because the function is undeveloped... you, and you alone have to blindly determine what is authentic data and what is error. 
If you fail to ever filter all of the errors out of the data, you are doomed to this unstoppable flood of uncertainty, until you succeed.

Once the person has effectively filtered the data perfectly, the function is now consciously at your disposal.

Beware: When developing the 8th, Demon function, once it is unlocked initially, the amount it completely overtakes you is incomprehensible, everything you know and all your guidelines, will vanish. My view on the world once I had 7 functions was obviously still dominant logical/intuitive with access to more alternatives, but once I tapped into Fe, My views just vanished, and I was lost, I had nothing to go by. Its a miracle I tamed Fe. It still seems like it shouldn't have been, it seemed impossible to control.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

LOL, you have not "developed" the shadow. It would come out under the activation of complexes - 8th function can only be forced out. Most of what you're talking about probably has nothing to do with functions. There's no proof of it. You can never consciously tap into unconscious functions with conscious intentions. Impossible. You'd have to experience the ego dystonic side of your mind (like having OCD) to do this - you don't want to go there.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

I would say that it's more likely that you have developed the transcendent function or that you don't actually understand the functions. 

I would also question what you mean by 'developed'? If you mean differentiated, I would disagree since I don't see how that would be possible.


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

I highly, highly, doubt, that I don't know what I'm talking about.


"According to Jung, the shadow sometimes overwhelms a person's actions; for example, when the conscious mind is shocked, confused, or paralyzed by indecision. 'A man who is possessed by his shadow is always standing in his own light and falling into his own traps ... living below his own level': hence, in terms of the story of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde, 'it must be Jekyll, the conscious personality, who integrates the shadow ... and not vice versa. Otherwise the conscious becomes the slave of the autonomous shadow'.Individuation inevitably raises that very possibility. As the process continues, and 'the libido leaves the bright upper world ... sinks back into its own depths...below, in the shadows of the unconscious', so too what comes to the forefront is 'what was hidden under the mask of conventional adaptation: the shadow', with the result that 'ego and shadow are no longer divided but are brought together in an — admittedly precarious — unity'.
The impact of such 'confrontation with the shadow produces at first a dead balance, a standstill that hampers moral decisions and makes convictions ineffective...tenebrositas, chaos, melancholia'. Consequently (as Jung knew from personal experience) 'in this time of descent — one, three, seven years, more or less — genuine courage and strength are required', with no certainty of emergence. Nevertheless Jung remained of the opinion that while 'no one should deny the danger of the descent ... every descent is followed by an ascent ...enantiodromia'; and assimilation of — rather than possession by — the shadow becomes at last a real possibility."


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

I am here to inform you that you are not able to break out of your dualistic human nature. You can´t break out of the system and play the Mod/creator of the game thats impossible.


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

Zero11 said:


> I am here to inform you that you are not able to break out of your dualistic human nature. You can´t break out of the system and play the Mod/creator of the game thats impossible.


I think you all are thinking I'm trying to say I've mastered all functions and limited by nothing.

I'm saying they're accessible. Without having to be in extreme distress for them to come out like they usually do.



Neverontime said:


> I would say that it's more likely that you have developed the transcendent function or that you don't actually understand the functions.
> 
> I would also question what you mean by 'developed'? If you mean differentiated, I would disagree since I don't see how that would be possible.


"The only hope is to hold the opposites in balance until what Jung called the Transcendent function kicks in and a person is able to unite the opposites."
This sounds a lot like what I'm trying to get across, please elaborate?


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Shadow comes thru the inferior - that's the function you're prolly referring to. Otherwise, if you haven't experienced psychological disturbances, there's no way you've developed the repressed orientations (although the orientation of the auxes to Jung didn't matter much, so you might naturally be able to go either way with these).


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I'm sorry, but you're probably deluding yourself. Tell me how you think they alter your actions IRL. I need proof.


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> I'm sorry, but you're probably deluding yourself. Tell me how you think they alter your actions IRL. I need proof.


I'm willing to explain and answer questions and such, if anyone has Skype, as I get across much better speaking, PM me?


----------



## mental blockstack (Dec 15, 2011)

Yeah, I knew an ENTJ who told everyone he had super-powered hearing.

Not to be dismissive though... I guess it could be possible? Sounds more like Ni though.


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

GYX_Kid said:


> Yeah, I knew an ENTJ who told everyone he had super-powered hearing.
> 
> Not to be dismissive though... I guess it could be possible? Sounds more like Ni though.


I'm very content on proving it, Skype, would be the best way.

Just for the calling aspect, not the video chat


----------



## Zero11 (Feb 7, 2010)

Zerosthename said:


> I think you all are thinking I'm trying to say I've mastered all functions and limited by nothing.
> 
> I'm saying they're accessible. Without having to be in extreme distress for them to come out like they usually do.


They are not accesible! The descriptions of the functions aren´t perfect so your understanding of the functions isn´t the same as the real phenomenon.


----------



## pushit (Dec 20, 2012)

I mean, it probably doesn't matter because even if you have used the shadow functions at one point or another, you use the dominant 4 more often.


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

Zero11 said:


> They are not accesible! The descriptions of the functions aren´t perfect so your understanding of the functions isn´t the same as the real phenomenon.


I offer proof. You can send rapid questions my way, forcing me to answer honestly, no premeditation, while listening to the authenticity in my voice.

I'm compliant with proving. Don't dismiss me until you hear me.


----------



## LiquidLight (Oct 14, 2011)

To have tamed the shadow (which is just silly on its face because, if you have studied Jung then you know no one can ever truly know the extent of the shadow) this would also mean you would have to have really dealt with the complexes that constellate those functions (assuming there is such thing as shadow functions at all and its not all just a fragment of Beebe's imagination). It's sort of like saying, "there is this side of me, that I don't know much about, but i have tamed it." First of all that's something of an ego-centric conscious delusion, because even someone like a Buddhist monk might spend an entire lifetime trying to reach that level of self-harmony, secondly all of this must be perceived through the lens of your ego (consciousness). You are never really seeing the unconscious for what it really is, it is always being filtered through conscious perception (via things like the functions). That's why its so hard for people to identify a shadow function vs. the inferior vs. a complex vs. some bad pizza they ate last night. It's why Jung and people like Hillman and others were careful about dream interpretation (even though that is a central focus of Jungianism) Jung figured it did no good if you tried to interpret the contents of your unconscious as experienced in the dream through your conscious mind, you had to learn to let the dream talk to you not try to figure it out, otherwise you might give it some meaning that it doesn't really have (I doubt he would've approved of things like 'dream dictionaries' for example). 

Now much of what you describe probably represents some eye-opening and you may perhaps be calling this stuff Daimon Fe or whatever, but I'm not sure your eyes are _that_ open lol. I don't even know that Jung himself would've gone that far. At best you might learn to recognize when that complex is constellated, and maybe learn to spot or withdraw any projections that come of it (at best) but even that is a stretch for something that is buried so far in the back of your mind. It's sort of like someone who experiences a trauma at a very young age and now at 45 wants to go back to the point of attack to fix it, but the incident is buried so deeply in the back that person's mind, repressed so far that you can really only practically deal with its effects. The person themselves may have not even been old enough to remember what happened. Of course things like this are quite common (just get into a conversation about relationships with people and you will just how influenced by formative experiences these people are and how much they don't recognize it) and that's why I'm cautious of people claiming to know the contents of their shadow (some awareness is a good thing) but to say "I have mastered myself" or something to that effect smells of ego-inflation and such a person is probably ripe to be rudely awakened when the full power of his shadow rears its head.


----------



## Black Ronin (Dec 26, 2011)

Since nobody has shown proof, let me use some samurai logic.

so...

Brains are plastic.
With training, you can alter your brain's structure and functionality.
Cognitive functions are the result – not the cause – of your brain's structure and functionality.
This means, training HAS influence on your cognitive functions.

Does this mean you can use your shadow functions? I say yes. With training you can develop most, if not all neural networks. For example, you can develop your left-handed motor skills if you are right-handed. Shadow functions are like your main cognitive functions, but symmetrically opposite. Why couldn't you develop your shadow functions?

I can also use the shadow functions btw. How well I can use them, that's my new challenge.


----------



## Nitou (Feb 3, 2010)

Confronting the shadow is mythological. What the OP is describing is similar to what I call the "Dark Night of the Soul." In Christian belief, a pious person may get close enough to God to be darkened by His light. A Shaman is initiated after being attacked by one or more spirits. The experience of the dark night is like being devoured by wild animals. It is hell. Once you get through it you have a new understanding. But the dark night may strike more than once in a lifetime.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

I'm surprised to hear so many people confidently stating that someone's "shadow" functions are essentially inaccessible.

Jung said that whether you were an extravert or an introvert corresponded to the attitude of your dominant function, and he also said that more people were essentially in the middle on E/I than were significantly extraverted or introverted.

If you assume it's possible to have a dominant function with an in-the-middle attitude, why would you expect, say, a Tx-dom to have either Ti or Te substantially blocked off from consciousness as a "shadow" function?

And if you assume it isn't possible to have an attitude-free dominant function — and you therefore assume that Jung's in-the-middle types lacked a dominant function — why would you expect that relatively large (at least as Jung saw it) group to have blocked-off "shadow" functions?

And if you're of the view that Jung's in-the-middle types _wouldn't_ have blocked-off shadow functions, do you think it makes sense to expect that someone with, say, _very mild_ extraversion would confront a strongly-walled-off "shadow" side in a way that made them (1) very different from an in-the-middle person, and (2) essentially the same (in that regard) as a strong extravert?

A final point to ponder: There's a lot of controversy about whether the attitude of the auxiliary function is the same as, or the opposite of, the attitude of the dominant. Myers said it's the opposite, but she acknowledged that the majority of Jung scholars disagreed with her. If, for an Ni-dom with a T-aux, either Ti or Te is in some walled-off place in the psyche that would seem to guarantee that the person would have a dramatically different relation to it than the auxiliary function, why isn't it more obvious which attitude applies to the auxiliary?


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

I came across the subject of "higher consciousness"... and this is exactly what I believe to have achieved.
Not in a spiritual, religious, or god-like context. I'm an agnostic theist, after all. 
I mean it in an intellectual context.


Through the application of such knowledge (traditionally the preserve of the world's great religions) to practical self-management, the awakening and development of faculties dormant in the ordinary human being is achieved.
Higher Consciousness is a developed state of consciousness in which attention is improved, refined and enhanced—and aspects of the mind (such as thought, and perception) are transcended. It is considered thus to be a _higher level of consciousness relative to ordinary consciousness, in the sense that a greater awareness of reality is achieved. In a secular context, higher consciousness is usually associated with exceptional control over one's mind and will, intellectual and moral enlightenment, and profound personal growth_


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

Seems like... I reached meta self-awareness... and felt the need to express my discovery...


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

Zerosthename said:


> View attachment 56988
> 
> 
> Seems like... I reached meta self-awareness... and felt the need to express my discovery...


Can I assume then that you have no ego anymore? That fear is something of the past?


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> Can I assume then that you have no ego anymore? That fear is something of the past?


I post not to feed an image, but to help others by way of offering my self of use


----------



## bearotter (Aug 10, 2012)

@Zerosthename: first of all, if you did tap into the "shadows," please explain what you mean by that. I could see there being different theories of "shadow" corresponding to different theories of extroversion/introversion, as @reckful wrote. 

There could be something interesting to it, but it may or may not in actuality refer to the same notion of shadow that @JungyesMBTIno refers to.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

Zerosthename said:


> I post not to feed an image, but to help others by way of offering my self of use


I see...I care for truth only. But I think I noticed some inconsistencies in your behavior. This is not my way off stepping on you but just a sincere way of searching for truth. I am curious.

So..does concentration play a major factor here? Is that what you are saying?


----------



## Carmine Ermine (Mar 11, 2012)

I believe @Zerosthename.

Everyone has some level of ability in all functions. It's just fun to explore what happens when you give them your attention. In terms of my Shadow functions, this is what I think of them:-

First shadow function - it's like a vortex. I often strongly have "the missing emotion" from Si (i.e. the emotion you get when you miss something like after a holiday ends).

Middle shadow functions - generally require a lot of conscious effort to use. My Te is used when I sometimes have to force myself to adhere to a structure or strategy, and my Fi is used when I have to change my basic attitude or personal feeling about something, which again requires me to "force myself". Funnily enough it's usually Fe that forces me use Te and Ti that forces me use Fi. For an ENTJ does this mean they have to force themselves to use Ni to control Si and Se to control Ne when those functions are needed?

Last shadow function - usually used on a very small scale, for example within a single interaction in the moment, with uncontrolled detection of possibilities. Ni usually overrides it and selects the "more important" possibilities. For an ENTJ is it usually their Fi that takes over when trying to use Fe?


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> I see...I care for truth only. But I think I noticed some inconsistencies in your behavior. This is not my way off stepping on you but just a sincere way of searching for truth. I am curious.
> 
> 
> So..does concentration play a major factor here? Is that what you are saying?



Well, to become aware of being self-aware, is a consciousness shift that I barely experienced today. My behavior may have been more erratic, before this latest shift.


Concentration, oh definitely, you have to remember what it was like when the shadow self forced that function out of you, and then try to induce it yourself, once unleashed, you must fight against it trying to manifest itself maliciously, and use it in your favor.




Carmine Ermine said:


> I believe @Zerosthename.
> 
> 
> Everyone has some level of ability in all functions. It's just fun to explore what happens when you give them your attention. In terms of my Shadow functions, this is what I think of them:-
> ...



ENTJs use Ni/Se, Tapping into Ne was very peculiar for me, it seems that, the higher your 'social intelligence', the easier it is to get the hang of, but you need to unlock Ti first, because you will need to process and be able to fully understand the intuitive information you got "seeing through" a person, for example.


Tapping into Si was something I developed when I decided I wanted to see why certain movies were good, why this genre doesn't appeal to my ears, but is popular, etc.
I basically compared and contrasted bad music to good music, and things like that, and also used Si to create "bookmarks" on my ideas, for example: I'm about to go to bed, and I write down -S+ on a post-it note.
When I wake up, I see that -S+ symbol, and it instantly jogs my memory on my elaborate mental diagram on the side of the Positive Self and the Negative. Some would mistake this for intuition, but it is not. That is a very basic example of utilizing Si, but hey, its a start.


Actually, Ti is very useful to unlock if it is a shadow, it can aid your other functions in understanding, and help you get the hang of using a function through visualization and knowing about a function, on top of practice.


(I also recommend Ni to everyone on top of Ti, so you can create situations and ideas followed by working them out and deciphering them in your head with Ti as well)


Fe was just unreal. I hated conforming my feelings to aid the comfort-ability of someone, because in my eyes, if they get uncomfortable about what I say, they're probably ST SF or NF and they need to develop more for taking whatever I say the wrong way, or if someone refuses to see my rational side, why would I let them be comfortable rejecting reason. Whenever I had used it as a shadow, I was always usually infuriated during the short times I had to "go with the flow".


I basically had to fall in love to unlock this one, but the moment I knew I had tamed it was when I was pondering about how ESFJ's have golden morals and are yet so hostile and nonnegotiable towards me.


Then it hit me. 
I shouldn't blame other's if they can't see what I do, they aren't knowingly rejecting reason, they're incapable of seeing it for what it is, and/or think I'm attacking their values.
Whether or not an ESFJ remains a stubborn, one-sided, irrational, the ESFJ is using the only functions they know how to use, and in the end, they're just trying to be a good person.


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

@Zerosthename

I asked you before if you have no fear anymore. You replied by saying that you don't want to feed an image. Now, I don't care about your image. I always just observe and only observe.

I think that when you become truly conscious, that fear becomes something of the past. Because you know and understand what fear is. This statement is related to Fe, the one function you didn't like because you had to conform your feelings. Now, I think that if you want to do something that benefits the other party, that it is all about what you *think* which is the right thing to do. So *power of though*t plays a crucial factor here in my opinion and not _function_. I think you can only be truly able to think if you can discard everything you know, if you do not feel the desire to identify yourself with anything anymore. Not a religion, not a political system etc. So you must stand alone. Can you relate to this?


----------



## Zerosthename (Nov 30, 2012)

All in Twilight said:


> @_Zerosthename_
> 
> I asked you before if you have no fear anymore. You replied by saying that you don't want to feed an image. Now, I don't care about your image. I always just observe and only observe.
> 
> I think that when you become truly conscious, that fear becomes something of the past. Because you know and understand what fear is. This statement is related to Fe, the one function you didn't like because you had to conform your feelings. Now, I think that if you want to do something that benefits the other party, that it is all about what you *think* which is the right thing to do. So *power of though*t plays a crucial factor here in my opinion and not _function_. I think you can only be truly able to think if you can discard everything you know, if you do not feel the desire to identify yourself with anything anymore. Not a religion, not a political system etc. So you must stand alone. Can you relate to this?


I very much so can relate. I suppose the best way to describe the discarding is... I was reformed, and now, I have an unfamiliar feeling about being alone, but it is stress free, if anything a sort of "neutral" feeling... I am content with being my self.

As far as fear goes, now that you mention it, I suppose I haven't felt any, I mostly have this seemingly-permanent slight feeling of relaxation... which promotes tolerance, patience, content, and a cushion against negative feelings or sensations... I am only explaining this as much as I can describe in words, remember, feelings can never be losslessly translated into text.


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Zerosthename said:


> I believe I have developed all eight functions, and have tamed the four shadow functions.


So this means you actually acquired 12 cognitive functions? Interesting indeed


----------



## All in Twilight (Oct 12, 2012)

Zerosthename said:


> I very much so can relate. I suppose the best way to describe the discarding is... I was reformed, and now, I have an unfamiliar feeling about being alone, but it is stress free, if anything a sort of "neutral" feeling... I am content with being my self.
> 
> As far as fear goes, now that you mention it, I suppose I haven't felt any, I mostly have this seemingly-permanent slight feeling of relaxation... which promotes tolerance, patience, content, and a cushion against negative feelings or sensations... I am only explaining this as much as I can describe in words, remember, feelings can never be losslessly translated into text.


I see. I am an ENFP 1w9 and as you might have noticed, Se is a shadow function. Now, I can "access" Se due to the intensive Tai Chi training I have had. I think that we can be more aware of our surroundings: the filter Se. I think this can be realized through meditation, the superior martial _*art*_ (Tai Chi) and through a tremendous amount of thought. I still think though that our reflexes, in my case Ne-Fi-Te-Si forces us to use our functions in a specific order that is our MBTI personality type. So I will always use Ne-Fi-Te-Si.

I do think though that *when we have time* to ponder about a whatever problem, we can through sheer will of the mind, use a shadow function. I believe this can be trained. Do you follow?


----------



## myjazz (Feb 17, 2010)

Zerosthename said:


> I came across the subject of "higher consciousness"... and this is exactly what I believe to have achieved.
> Not in a spiritual, religious, or god-like context. I'm an agnostic theist, after all.
> I mean it in an intellectual context.
> 
> ...


You are confusing what @Neverontime mentioned earlier about Transcended functions...apparently after looking up Transcended. Jung meant in no way the same as in Transcended towards transcended or transcend function...but in context it is what he meant in a way but not as in like "Buddha" Transcended or some higher being. Everyone and yes I mean everyone use's Transcended function


----------



## Carmine Ermine (Mar 11, 2012)

Zerosthename said:


> Tapping into Ne was very peculiar for me, it seems that, the higher your 'social intelligence', the easier it is to get the hang of, but you need to unlock Ti first, because you will need to process and be able to fully understand the intuitive information you got "seeing through" a person, for example.
> 
> Tapping into Si was something I developed when I decided I wanted to see why certain movies were good, why this genre doesn't appeal to my ears, but is popular, etc.
> I basically compared and contrasted bad music to good music, and things like that, and also used Si to create "bookmarks" on my ideas, for example: I'm about to go to bed, and I write down -S+ on a post-it note.
> When I wake up, I see that -S+ symbol, and it instantly jogs my memory on my elaborate mental diagram on the side of the Positive Self and the Negative. Some would mistake this for intuition, but it is not. That is a very basic example of utilizing Si, but hey, its a start.


Kind of like I thought, this could be viewed as using Ni to help unlock Si (as I use Ti to unlock Fi which is the ESTP's equivalent). Also perhaps using some Se to help unlock Ne.



> Fe was just unreal. I hated conforming my feelings to aid the comfort-ability of someone, because in my eyes, if they get uncomfortable about what I say, they're probably ST SF or NF and they need to develop more for taking whatever I say the wrong way, or if someone refuses to see my rational side, why would I let them be comfortable rejecting reason. Whenever I had used it as a shadow, I was always usually infuriated during the short times I had to "go with the flow".
> 
> I basically had to fall in love to unlock this one, but the moment I knew I had tamed it was when I was pondering about how ESFJ's have golden morals and are yet so hostile and nonnegotiable towards me.
> 
> ...


Also sounds like you had to unlock the last one (as you called it, "demon function") through your inferior function. I guess my trouble with Ne (my "demon function") is how it makes so much humour out of things Se finds "disturbing". ENFPs probably also have trouble with the same barrier in that they may find when they use Se they find the details "disturbing". So the barrier ESFJs have to Te could be the same as the one you (as an ENTJ) had to surpass. In that maybe using the other Extraverted Judging function seems too "ruthless" or maybe just plain "wrong".


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

I'm pretty sure your examples have nada to do with type. Thinking is just thinking - not any kind of social superpower - same with intuition - it's just intuition and overall, this is all how you rationalize ego decisions toward yourself - it has nothing to do with anything other than your own personal motives and how you feel most natural and in touch with personal meaningfulness in reaching out or in to yourself - sort of like running your decisions through ego checkpoints when that super rational voice suddenly starts running through your mind in the midst of your actions and typical thoughts - you might see things in a flash, a sense impression, opinions, technical connections, feelings might guide you in a new direction, etc. That would be your ego in action behind the persona and all you "know" yourself to be on a shallow level.


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

Most of the JCF talk in this thread is nonsense. Too technical (it can be applied almost anywhere other than to personal decisions, which is truly what this stuff is about).


----------



## Acerbusvenator (Apr 12, 2011)

Seriously? You are 17 years old!
Developing yourself is a process, a long one at that!


I was half intrigued until I saw that, but now I'm just offended by how little MBTI you know tho assume you know!
Not only that I don't believe that you got more than 4 functions, but you have no basis for what you say.
the person's work you are mentioning is Beebe and he is proved to be stupefied. I've never met anyone who has identified with a single type from him that has fitted reality.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

LiquidLight said:


> To have tamed the shadow (which is just silly on its face because, if you have studied Jung then you know no one can ever truly know the extent of the shadow) this would also mean you would have to have really dealt with the complexes that constellate those functions (assuming there is such thing as shadow functions at all and its not all just a fragment of Beebe's imagination). It's sort of like saying, "there is this side of me, that I don't know much about, but i have tamed it." First of all that's something of an ego-centric conscious delusion, because even someone like a Buddhist monk might spend an entire lifetime trying to reach that level of self-harmony, secondly all of this must be perceived through the lens of your ego (consciousness). You are never really seeing the unconscious for what it really is, it is always being filtered through conscious perception (via things like the functions). That's why its so hard for people to identify a shadow function vs. the inferior vs. a complex vs. some bad pizza they ate last night. It's why Jung and people like Hillman and others were careful about dream interpretation (even though that is a central focus of Jungianism) Jung figured it did no good if you tried to interpret the contents of your unconscious as experienced in the dream through your conscious mind, you had to learn to let the dream talk to you not try to figure it out, otherwise you might give it some meaning that it doesn't really have (I doubt he would've approved of things like 'dream dictionaries' for example).
> 
> Now much of what you describe probably represents some eye-opening and you may perhaps be calling this stuff Daimon Fe or whatever, but I'm not sure your eyes are that open lol. I don't even know that Jung himself would've gone that far. At best you might learn to recognize when that complex is constellated, and maybe learn to spot or withdraw any projections that come of it (at best) but even that is a stretch for something that is buried so far in the back of your mind. It's sort of like someone who experiences a trauma at a very young age and now at 45 wants to go back to the point of attack to fix it, but the incident is buried so deeply in the back that person's mind, repressed so far that you can really only practically deal with its effects. The person themselves may have not even been old enough to remember what happened. Of course things like this are quite common (just get into a conversation about relationships with people and you will just how influenced by formative experiences these people are and how much they don't recognize it) and that's why I'm cautious of people claiming to know the contents of their shadow (some awareness is a good thing) but to say "I have mastered myself" or something to that effect smells of ego-inflation and such a person is probably ripe to be rudely awakened when the full power of his shadow rears its head.


That's an interesting point, this 'delusion'. What makes you and others believe you are not deluded, is that because there is inner logic in the model that you embrace? Ultimately 'shadow', 'unconscious' or 'ego' are constructs and projected metaphors, and Jung didn't quite invent the wheel, rather synthesized a range of different theories, some of which span over thousands of years of collected experience, with his personal observations. 

I really don't see why people need to react so demeaning, either for his metaphorical choice of the word 'tame', or using muscled language like 'if you have studied Jung', or making someone's age matter. Why would Jung call the acknowledgement of the notion of one's 'shadow' the 'first act of courage'?

Your arguments are merely based on analogies, theoretical, hypothetical and sometimes circular reasoning, that doesn't strike me as experiential which ultimately makes it a bit arbitrary for me. What makes you think it is not possible to 'go back to the point of attack to fix it?' Compare it with a process of desensitization, or sometimes catharsis. It's a process of becoming aware of what used to be unconscious. You become aware of a chain of cause and effect that has conditioned you. 

You don't see a plate hanging 'this is your shadow'. Or 'this is the end of your shadow'. Strictly speaking you can't even call it unconscious anymore, the moment you become aware of a part of yourself that was held away from consciousness, sometimes for very good reasons. You become aware of memories that seemed forgotten, or couldn't see the significance of, because indeed you were too young to understand what happened. I've gone back to memories when I was 2 years old, because that's where the kind of traumas can be found, one doesn't even know something traumatic was experienced, and at the time you didn't know whether to laugh or cry. And yes you can fix it. If any of you haven't made that exploration yourself, that's ok, but why not just refrain from calling other people silly or deluded? What is this 'dark drive' to act like this anyway? 



Kundalini Yoga said:


> According to the psychiatrist Carl Jung, "...the concept of Kundalini has for us only one use, that is, to describe our own experiences with the unconscious..."
> 
> Jung's seminar on kundalini yoga, presented to the Psychological Club in Zurich in 1932, has been widely regarded as a milestone in the psychological understanding of Eastern thought. Kundalini yoga presented Jung with a model for the development of higher consciousness, and he interpreted its symbols in terms of the process of individuation".[SUP]
> [33][/SUP]


----------



## JungyesMBTIno (Jul 22, 2011)

The unconscious is always the unconscious. It's just a technical truth, nothing you can really do about it other than accept it - in that way will you ever be "aware" of it. Delusions are essentially ideas people have that cannot be reinforced by experiences, either tangible or psychological shifts. Most of the ideas people have about type here are essentially delusions, because they aren't rooted in rational experiences, but instead, they're kind of takes on projections or figments of people's imaginations, stereotypes that people got from places they may not even remember, etc. I think people go into this stuff with this ridiculous mentality that all of this stuff is somehow supposed to be "emotionally riveting," which causes them to project unconscious content from their imaginations that represents some kind of psychological portent for them onto this stuff, which frankly, turns this stuff to shit - garbage in, garbage out. I blame MBTI for trusting the average uneducated person with this stuff to begin with.


----------



## mimesis (Apr 10, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> The unconscious is always the unconscious. It's just a technical truth, nothing you can really do about it other than accept it - in that way will you ever be "aware" of it. Delusions are essentially ideas people have that cannot be reinforced by experiences, either tangible or psychological shifts. Most of the ideas people have about type here are essentially delusions, because they aren't rooted in rational experiences, but instead, they're kind of takes on projections or figments of people's imaginations, stereotypes that people got from places they may not even remember, etc. I think people go into this stuff with this ridiculous mentality that all of this stuff is somehow supposed to be "emotionally riveting," which causes them to project unconscious content from their imaginations that represents some kind of psychological portent for them onto this stuff, which frankly, turns this stuff to shit - garbage in, garbage out. I blame MBTI for trusting the average uneducated person with this stuff to begin with.


Technical truth? Sure, yellow will always be yellow, because when it becomes orange, it's orange. I believe what you assert here about the unconscious is called 'postulate'. And I guess your experience doesn't allow you to see it different than that. I don't think it is really in line with what Jung wrote, for instance about the Individuation process. You seem to identify yourself strongly with Jung, although your views don't rarely strike me as somewhat idiosyncratic. Which I don't mind, because I like to keep my mind open for alternative views, however you seem to believe it is the correct interpretation. 

Which brings me to 'delusion'. I'm afraid your way of reasoning doesn't protect yourself from delusion. For instance a self-fullfilling prophecy will be 'reinforced by experience', but this 'rational experience' is 'rooted' in the same predisposition of apperception, (possible cognitive distortion, e.g. bias) and subsequently predisposition in anticipation/attitude (judgement). So I don't think you make a strong case here, either about others or yourself.


----------



## CaptainWayward (Jun 8, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> The unconscious is always the unconscious. It's just a technical truth, nothing you can really do about it other than accept it - in that way will you ever be "aware" of it. Delusions are essentially ideas people have that cannot be reinforced by experiences, either tangible or psychological shifts. Most of the ideas people have about type here are essentially delusions, because they aren't rooted in rational experiences, but instead, they're kind of takes on projections or figments of people's imaginations, stereotypes that people got from places they may not even remember, etc. I think people go into this stuff with this ridiculous mentality that all of this stuff is somehow supposed to be "emotionally riveting," which causes them to project unconscious content from their imaginations that represents some kind of psychological portent for them onto this stuff, which frankly, turns this stuff to shit - garbage in, garbage out. I blame MBTI for trusting the average uneducated person with this stuff to begin with.



I'm fairly certain jung's conscious and unconscious deals with which functions holds the illusion of free will and traversing the stack is simply a matter of relaxing the dominate function and every piece of subsequent information that follows. So, we can't control the lower functions, but we can be conscious of their doings, thus determine our actions. 

It's probably hard to believe if you've never been in a flow-state-of-mind, but there is a specific mindset you can enter that feels entirely too robotic and all too not 'I.' I'm sure there are a great deal of people whom play video games and can attest to stumbling upon it at least one.


----------



## reckful (Jun 19, 2012)

JungyesMBTIno said:


> *Most of the ideas people have about type here are essentially delusions*, because they aren't rooted in rational experiences, but instead, *they're kind of takes on projections or figments of people's imaginations*, stereotypes that people got from places they may not even remember, etc. ... *I blame MBTI for trusting the average uneducated person with this stuff to begin with.*


I agree. The deeper Jungian truths should probably be kept locked away in special facilities that only properly educated sages such as yourself have access to.

Meanwhile, speaking of "projections or figments of people's imaginations"... A few days ago you posted this in another thread:



JungyesMBTIno said:


> The 8th function is almost fully unconscious and totally primitive - you really don't have any kind of identity there - you have more of an anti-identity there - the thing that is just the death of you, pretty much, although you might dip into it for help to assist your ego. It's closest to the collective unconscious and is rationalized in a rather base way. It's said that it's closest to the neurotic identity of a person (*Jung talks of this often in Psychological Types*).



And I replied:



reckful said:


> Jung talks about the 8th function "often" in Psychological Types? That's news to me. Can you point me to a couple of examples?



Are you still hunting for those examples, or have you concluded that those Jungian discussions of the 8th function were just projections or figments of your imagination?


----------



## Carmine Ermine (Mar 11, 2012)

I think the following is implying that having a goal of developing all 8 functions is a good idea:

Cognitive Processes and Skill Development


----------



## Cellar Door (Jun 3, 2012)

Carmine Ermine said:


> I think the following is implying that having a goal of developing all 8 functions is a good idea:
> 
> Cognitive Processes and Skill Development


Trying to be the best person you can be is a good goal. Trying to achieve some totally absurd schizophrenic state is not, and that's what trying to develop all 8 means. It would mean you were every type simultaneously. 

This guy is obviously a troll.


----------



## Jerdle (Dec 30, 2015)

zerosthename said:


> beware: When developing the 4th, inferior function, once it is unlocked initially, the amount it completely overtakes you is incomprehensible, everything you know and all your guidelines, will vanish. My view on the world once i had 3 functions was obviously still dominant logical/intuitive with access to more alternatives, but once i tapped into fi, my views just vanished, and i was lost, i had nothing to go by. Its a miracle i tamed fi. It still seems like it shouldn't have been, it seemed impossible to control.


ftfy


----------



## reybridge (Feb 24, 2014)

I am surprised so many people here think shadow functions are not accessible. Shadow functions can be used. Because why can not? Even an INTP must use Fi function to have some motivations to work. So, as long as there are INTPs in a work place, it is the prove that people use all functions alternately. It is just the 4 first functions will be used more often. Nothing more.


----------



## Clayfighter (Jun 21, 2016)

Did everyone just google shadow functions to figure out whether or not to agree with the OP?

The views on this actually differ greatly depending on who you talk to. Also why would you not be able to use shadow functions? If you can use intuition and MBTI says you use NI or NE...why cant you use the other form of intuition...it is essentially the same principle, and intuition is formed generally the same way regardless of if it is an experience or comes inward.

Show me any evidence or proof/logic that you cannot use another form intuition if you are an intuitive type. What makes you think this is a dichotomous stance that makes sense? its not.

What?!?!?! we only use 4 functions and cannot process the world any other way? Ambiverts dont exist? give me a break. Even Jung said that some people would not fall into one type category.


----------



## Eric B (Jun 18, 2010)

I've modified my views since this was started, and now I emphasize "*ego states*" as what carry the functions. You have a main ego centre (the main sense of "I"), which then takes upon the archetype of the "hero" as it pursues its own goals. There are also lesser senses of I, with a total of eight that specifically involve typological preference. These will all choose one function (S, N, T, F) and one orientation (i-individual, or e-environmental), thus pairing together a function and attitude. So the hero will embody what we call the "dominant function" (with the dominant attitude as well). 
For the sake of balance, you must also draw from the opposite orientation, and the opposite mode of processing from the dominant function (judgment or perception), so a lesser ego-state, that generally takes on a "supporting" role or "parental" archetype, will view things through this other function-attitude combo.
*This is what forms what we are calling "type"*.

The functions are basically divisions of reality (the tangible vs the intangible, the impersonal vs the personal, and the individual vs the environment), so the ones chosen will be "reflected" in the functions and attitudes they were chosen over, being lower down in consciousness. The two ego states are likewise mirrored, so that the parent will be reflected by a more "childish" ego state, that uses the tertiary function, and the hero will be mirrored by an "inferior" ego state using the inferior function.
These are further reimaged by reversing the unchosen attitudes for each of the four functions, and these will be carried by even less conscious versions of the four ego states. (hegative her, negative parent, negative child of sorts, and a negative inferiority complex that becomes "destructive" in ways). These are what's been called the "Shadows". Really, it's not so much the _functions_ that are "Shadows"; it's the _ego states_. *The functions are less psychically conscious because of the ego states* (but otherwise are conscious; else only an "SP" type would be able to recognize the current senses, for instance).

What's been called (perhaps misleadingly so) "_developing the functions_" would really be *becoming more aware of the lower ego-states*. So if you think you've "developed all the functions", they you're saying all of these ego-states are regularly coming into consciousness. I guess it's hypothetically possible; bit the lower down you go, the more stressful situations it takes to make them become more regular like that. The ego states still bear their negative archetypal contexts, so it's not like you now have all these "good", positive uses of "all eight functions". (and no one has "individuated" either, which would amount to being able to see undivided reality).

More than likely, a person is taking instances of "undifferentiated" functions (like the "seeing, hearing, touch, taste, smell any type can do, apart from the typological ego-states), and mistaking this for "function-development".


----------



## Felipe (Feb 25, 2016)

I'd say "bitch please", just the fact that you convinced yourself of that and decided to make a thread shows you have a lot of 'Fe' to develop yet.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart (Aug 18, 2015)

I doubt the functions were ever inaccessible in the first place. They simply come out in certain ways for certain types that are typical for that type, and change over time with use and practice.


----------



## Lord Fenix Wulfheart (Aug 18, 2015)

EDIT: Removed post-quote since quoted post was from 2013.


----------

