User Tag List

123 Last

Results 1 to 10 of 25

  1. #1
    Retired Member Wonkavision's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,155

    Default John Beebe on the Archetypes

    About John Beebe (from Wikipedia):

    John Beebe, M.D., (born June 24, 1939, in Washington, DC) is a Jungian analyst in practice in San Francisco. He received degrees from Harvard College and the University of Chicago medical school. He is a past President of the C.G. Jung Institute of San Francisco, where he is currently on the teaching faculty, as well as Assistant Clinical Professor of Psychiatry at the University of California Medical School, San Francisco. He is a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association .

    A brief introduction to his ideas:

    Video: Dr. John Beebe introduces his October 2008 workshop on the archetypes


    An article by Dr. Beebe, expounding on the archetypes, and how he personally developed his ideas:

    http://www.ccc-apt.org/system/files/...+model+APT.pdf


    In this article, Beebe explains why he believes the "four functions are only half the story of how consciousness arranges itself," and why he does not regard the type profile as a rigid hierarchy of differentiation of the functions.


    ---What do you think of his approach/style/terminology?

    ---Do you find his explanations helpful?

    ---What about his diagrams?

    ---How does your view compare/contrast with Beebe's?

    ---And do you have links to any other relevant info?



    Anything you can share would be appreciated.
    __________________


    I'M OUTTA HERE.

    IT'S BEEN FUN.

    TAKE CARE.

    PEACE OUT!!!


  2. #2
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    I've been reading this (pdf):

    http://www.typeinsights.com/FreeArti...ctionmodel.pdf

    but I cannot really picture from it how these "shadow functions" express themselves". can anyone explain or recommend further reading?
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  3. #3
    Senior Member sculpting's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    4,226

    Default

    hey tcda-

    This is something I have been fascinated in for awhile.
    For me it is VERY real.

    As an NeFiTeSi ENFP, my Beebe shadow would be NiFeTiSe INFJ.
    It is most noticable as extreme introversion and withdraw-Ni and building a massive wall to emotional protect myself-Fe. This wall is like the "INFJ doorslam"-but on the entire world.

    How do I get here?
    If someone hurts me very much emotionally I end up here. Also when others around me are in pain-I mirror their pain with Fi and it can be very overwhelming. I cant process the overwhelming emotion fast enough, so it is like i undergo a total shutdown. This triggers a weird defensive mechanism. I can feel my entire mind retreat inside and hide in a shell or sorts. All feeling and pain is quenched. It isnt a Tert Te/inf Si defense (Thats a bitchslap). Instead I have no desire to interact with others. I actually totally loose the need to seek their affirmation in anyway. I will go to work and take down all the decorations in my office-the things that externalize my identity. I will cut ties with other people. I reject them before they can reject me.

    I will typically spend about 1.5 days in this shadow space, in contemplation, then reemerge through a cycle of anger (TeSi) then work through the event that triggered the pain (Fi).

    I can now recognize this happening, and minimize the external effects, -before understanding the Beebe shadows I didnt have a structural model to understand why I did this. Now with a structure I can choose logically how i want to respond, rather than just react.


    In others:
    Many ENTPs here and IRL have told me they felt like unhealthy INTJs during their late teens/early twenties. Most noticable was the shadow Te from their descriptions. I have seen a 44 yo ENTP in a shadow INTJ state. I thought he was an INTJ, but I could not find his Fi. He also took the normal INTJ stuff that can be a little annoying-like being a bit pedantic-but multiplied it by ten-then spewed Ti. In the evenings he is an alcoholic and cheats on his SO and is the craziest Ne user I have ever seen.

    I have also recently met a few INTJs who note a shadow ENTP-but it just seems like the Ne is problematic-they get kinda paranoid.

    (There is a trend for the highest extroverted function to be the most obvious???)


    Using Healthily?:


    I am also able to now tap and use a very weak NiFe in a healthy way-but it IS WEIRD and it is almost like becoming a different person to do this. It is painful as I have to let go of the tight Fi values. It feels WRONG. Like turning myself inside out.

    Ni is there too,alone seemingly dependent upon my hormone levels, weak granted, but will give me really strange insights. i have also met several INTJs who seem to be able to tap into Ne as well, again weak compared to mine.


    But yeah lots more to understand here, so just my thoughts above.

  4. #4
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,442

    Default

    I think a mix of Beebe and Lenore Thomson is best and easiest to understand. They clarify and balance each other out.

    Before you fan out eight functions (Xy), it's best to go back to the original four functions (S, N, T, F) and the two orientations (i, e). The ego chooses its dominant function and orientation. The others fall into place as an auxiliary is chosen in the opposite orientation, the tertiary is placed in the dominant orientation as the next defense of the dominant attitude, and the inferior also falls into the opposite orientation.
    Four complexes align with these: the dominant being "heroic", the aux; "parental", since we use it to help others, and tertiary becomes "childish" because it is the ego's first defense against the opposite orientation, and the inferior is like the deep soul.

    Now, for the dominant and tertiary, the opposite orientation is rejected. The Aux and inferior are rejected from the dominant orientation. So these rejected combinations of functions and orientations make up the shadow. And the negative aspects of the four main complexes associate with them, since they were rejected from consciousness. An oppositional negative hero, a critical parent (cranky old man or woman), a tricky bad child, and a demon.

    It's all a system of mirroring and paralleling.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  5. #5
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    ok, thankyou for the replies. I can see the model conceptually but am having trouble envisioning it in practice. Does nayone have articles/pictures/videos/"memes" on it like we do ont his forum with regard to the conscious functions?
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  6. #6
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,444

    Default

    Let's hope everyone reads it.
    Here's a quote from the article:

    The second observation is that these function-attitudes, though having typical characteristics that 86 years of type research have repeatedly verified, are not expressed in the same way by every individual who deploys them. There is a normal variation, not only in the strength and reliability of the functions, according to the degree of preference and practice that the individual will bring to the expression of each type of consciousness, but also in the role the individual enters when expressing a particular consciousness.
    Something so simple to understand, and yet people still don't realize the FAs are expressed differently - even with those of the same type.
    This is why it's reckless to make claims about people's "strengths" and "weaknesses" within an alleged type.
    In each type group, the function development can vary to such a degree that the people don't even look alike.
    Some people can develop their Aux and Tert to such a degree they can have more strength than their Dom.

    Maybe we should start a thread to see if people know what the word 'consciousness' means.
    The functions are not "world views," or a "philosophy" as some have claimed in this forum.
    Jung had an M.D. and was a psychiatrist. He was not a philosopher.

    By the way, I actually disagree with Eric about Thomson.
    She makes way too many assertions about types as if they are absolute.
    It was the first thing I noticed about her. Her thinking is too rigid for my taste.

    There is no one "right way" to do anything. That includes psychological development.
    So if a person develops their functions in way that is different from someone else, it doesn't make them "unhealthy" or "unbalanced."
    If someone thinks it does, that tells me more about that person's thinking than the person they claim is "unbalanced."

  8. #8
    Reason vs Being ragashree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Mine
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaguar View Post
    Something so simple to understand, and yet people still don't realize the FAs are expressed differently - even with those of the same type.
    This is why it's reckless to make claims about people's "strengths" and "weaknesses" within an alleged type.

    In each type group, the function development can vary to such a degree that the people don't even look alike.
    Some people can develop their Aux and Tert to such a degree it can be more reliable for the person than their Dom.
    There is no one "right way" to do anything. That includes psychological development.
    So if a person develops their functions in way that is different from someone else, it doesn't make them "unhealthy" or "unbalanced."
    If someone thinks it does, that tells me more about that person's thinking than the person they claim is "unbalanced."
    Indeed. I do find it wearying sometimes when people insist on trying to make deductions about someone's thinking processes based purely on the theoretical function orientation of their Mbti type. Mbti doesn't tell us a whole lot about relative function strengths in individuals, because it doesn't assess them, it infers them from other information, and this inference is rather weak because it has no basis beyond overall function preference and a somewhat speculative theory of opposites, which need not hold true in any individual case.

    There seems to be a tendency for people to get so enthusiastic about the nice, neat, apparently comprehensive theory and the way it arranges the functions that they presume it to have some meaningful predictive capacity and to be capable of providing valid conclusions without the need for further information about the individual. This is simply not true, though I suppose it saves theory fetishists having to actually use their powers of observation, when there exists a convenient. hermetically sealed set of self-validating prejudices they can turn to...
    Look into my avatar. Look deep into my avatar...

  9. #9
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    My feeling is that trying to create a whole shadow type of the "unused" bottom four functions is a wash. I mean, this is just smoke and mirrors, isn't it? A fairly arbitrary system created on mostly a theoretical basis?

    I can see where particular functions might be "shadow functions" -- if you are really good at one thing, it's because you spent a lot of energy and focus developing it to the exclusion of its opposite function -- but a whole discernible type? It seems quite the stretch.

    For an example, my shadow type here is supposedly ENTJ. I don't see myself as having ENTJ weaknesses any more than any other type, it's very much a Forer effect (IMO). THe big problem? My Te is pathetic. ENTJ type weaknesses revolve around having a too-dominant Te at the exclusion of Feeling-style functions. ENTJ might be considered my "shadow" by Beebe, but I have a pathetic Te and don't prefer it in the least! Therefore any weaknesses that are related to Te in a typical personality will not be manifest by me. What typically happens is that when Ti+Ne fails, I'll try to drop into an F function as a complete "change out" and because I haven't had much practice with it, that's where I can show ill-use of a function... an F function.

    I never drop into Te functionality unless F is irrelevant.

    Iroincally, the few times I've had to use Te functionality on a personal level, it's actually been positive.
    I have not abused it or overused it, I've used it just enough to fix the problem.

    The only issues I've seen with Te has been in social situations where I am in a position of authority, where I can try to apply a rule to enforce over the behavior of others but then feel bad about it because I feel like it is not being applied consistently or fairly, or that not all considerations are being taken into account. That's probably the strongest support I can offer for the sort of reasoning shown in this thread... but I do not feel it is very compelling.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #10
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    My feeling is that trying to create a whole shadow type of the "unused" bottom four functions is a wash. I mean, this is just smoke and mirrors, isn't it? A fairly arbitrary system created on mostly a theoretical basis?

    I can see where particular functions might be "shadow functions" -- if you are really good at one thing, it's because you spent a lot of energy and focus developing it to the exclusion of its opposite function -- but a whole discernible type? It seems quite the stretch.

    For an example, my shadow type here is supposedly ENTJ. I don't see myself as having ENTJ weaknesses any more than any other type, it's very much a Forer effect (IMO). THe big problem? My Te is pathetic. ENTJ type weaknesses revolve around having a too-dominant Te at the exclusion of Feeling-style functions. ENTJ might be considered my "shadow" by Beebe, but I have a pathetic Te and don't prefer it in the least! Therefore any weaknesses that are related to Te in a typical personality will not be manifest by me. What typically happens is that when Ti+Ne fails, I'll try to drop into an F function as a complete "change out" and because I haven't had much practice with it, that's where I can show ill-use of a function... an F function.

    I never drop into Te functionality unless F is irrelevant.

    Iroincally, the few times I've had to use Te functionality on a personal level, it's actually been positive.
    I have not abused it or overused it, I've used it just enough to fix the problem.

    The only issues I've seen with Te has been in social situations where I am in a position of authority, where I can try to apply a rule to enforce over the behavior of others but then feel bad about it because I feel like it is not being applied consistently or fairly, or that not all considerations are being taken into account. That's probably the strongest support I can offer for the sort of reasoning shown in this thread... but I do not feel it is very compelling.
    I am not saying Beebe's model is necessarilly true, because like oyu I have yet to see how it works in reality (though I am still open as the theory is new to me).

    However the highlighted bit wouldn't necessarilly be incompatible, as the "opposing personality" as I understand it would tend to be our most developed shadow function.

    Also to be fair to Beebe he doesn't say that he is listing the fucntions in terms of frequency usage, but rather in a more "qualitative" way, i.e. the role we take on when using them. This is what I am still trying to envisage in practice.

    Regarding the issue of Thompson, what I always found hard to accept from some of her biggest admirers on the forum, is the idea that the introverted function is a "compeltely different" one to its extraverted coutnerpart. Beebe's idea that a function can express itself in extraverted or introverted "attitudes", and that in doing so it casts a shadow of the opposite atittude, makes much more sense to me.

    the other model seems much more arbitrary, i.e. to completely seperate Ti and Te rather than seeing a "unity of opposites", within which one pole "negates" the other (but that's my marxism showing I guess).
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

Similar Threads

  1. John Edwards On WTC Building 7
    By FranG in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-02-2009, 07:11 PM
  2. Dont trip on the Rootball
    By RootBall in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-05-2007, 09:35 PM
  3. My thoughts on the I phone
    By Opivy1980 in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 07-09-2007, 06:38 AM
  4. The archetypes
    By furbo in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-08-2007, 07:39 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO