For example the theory goes that you and I as intp would fall back on Ni to criticize/demoralize others (senex/witch), or when in complete meltdown, express oruselves through Fi (demon).
Personally this is what I am most interested to see examples of in practice.
Once you understand what the arms and spines are, that's when the whole thing falls into place. Mirrors and parallels again; (NOT "mirrors and smoke"!).
The ego has its operating charter, the dominant function. The opposite function and attitude are rejected, and become inferior. We on one hand consciously reject it, but on the other, feel an incompleteness without it. We project it onto potential love partners. This begins the "spine"; which deals with the ego's relation to self.
The ego chooses an auxiliary function, which it places int he rejected opposite orientation like the inferior. Since the dominant is the operating charter; what is the purpose of the aux.? To reach out to others. It is mirrored by the tertiary, which is the opposite function, serves an opposite "childlike" role, and, like a sort of double negative; is in the dominant attitude. The ego then often runs to it to defend the dominant way of seeing things. Thus, the "tertiary temptation" is born. Now we see the development of the "arm", which deals with ego's relationship with others.
The "other four" are just the rejected opposite orientations of the primary four. And they are picked up by the rejected negative aspects of the primary four archetypes (which Lenore also points out are actually complexes).
Another thing I was beginning to grasp more today, is the fact that the shadows are about projection. Berens associates the inferior with "projection"; but in reality, any archetype not under conscious control will end up projected onto others.
I'm still trying to fully understand this, but I think examples I could give, is that in those posts where I awhile ago mentioned fictional characters who were "opposing personality" figures to me; the OP is apparently something I project onto them. Or their personalities resonate with this complex within myself. Likewise, Ni will resonate with this really disgruntled part of myself that picks out negative significance in events. I then project it on the world. I've felt guilty about personal ethics, and when someone appears high and mighty (self-righteous), I project this evil complex onto them, which then leads me to seek to knock them down from from their lofty position. I'm trying to figure how I project the Trickster on others. Probably involves arguing over facts and such (feeling double-bound by them, and trying to double bind others, in return).
Shadows are ultimately supposed to be "owned", and seen as part of one's self, which leads to the process of individuation (which has been popularly misconstrued as "developing all the functions"). This I'm also now trying to understand more.
Here are the ones I had collected over the past year or so (plus the two linked earlier):
The basics, and how he evolved the model:
Some other informative articles:
"TYPOLOGY IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTEGRITY: An Interview with Dr. John Beebe", In Touch August, 2000 http://www.centerpointec.com/files/t...evelopment.pdf
"A Jungian Analyst Talks About Psychological Types: A Visit with John Beebe" - DVD (transcript online at A Jungian Analyst Talks about Psychological Types)
Type templates you can use to see which ones fit you best:
Wellness Resources of Vermont
He introduced his model in "A new model of psychological types" (1988), C.G. Jung Institute of Chicago.
One extensive printed article by Beebe is "An Archetypal Model of the Self in Dialogue" in the Theory & Psychology journal, offered for a price or subscription, at: An Archetypal Model of the Self in Dialogue -- Beebe 12 (2): 267 -- Theory & Psychology. He even analyzes Woody Allen's movie Husbands and Wives in light of the archetypes.
"UNDERSTANDING CONSCIOUSNESS THROUGH THE THEORY OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TYPES", Chapter 4, Analytical Psychology: Contemporary Perspectives in Jungian Analysis, Joseph Cambray and Linda Carter (Editors), Hove and New York: Brunner Routledge, 2004, pp. 83-115. is like a more detailed and in depth version of "Evolving the 8 Function Model"
Here, in a typology discussion, I try to outline the 32 possible shadow function roles: http://www.typologycentral.com/forum...21-post68.html
I also just today began looking up Donald Kalsched, whom I heard was a likely influence on Beebe's theory. In his page on his book on trauma; you can see the root of some of the archetypes:
Donald Kalsched - Specializing in Early Childhood Trauma