• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Archetypes of the Functions

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
We are basically emulating as opposed to using a native method. To me this emulation would be more integration and less recovery.
Well, I only used "recovery" to describe integration, based on the premise that this stuff was once suppressed. It's not so literal, and this is just semantic.
If Si has enough concrete detail it can emulate an Ni event template.
Yeah. You have a sense of what will haoppen based on whathappened int he past with the same events. The difference is that with Si, it is the concrete event itself, and with it's a concept based on or associated with it.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
The summary of the whole concept of the archetypes; particularly the shadows, and the five questions I had compiled as to understand the whole thing in a nutshell. (I sometimes said four, from either forgetting one of them, or combining two):

1) What exactly triggers them in us
2) How others' "use" (manifestation) of them affects us
3) how they affect ourselves, inside
4) how we use them on others
5) when the "good" or "bad" sides of them surface

So it seems

1) The complexes (personal unconscious) are triggered when a situation invokes a memory of an event associated with the corresponding archetype. Like something that makes us feel inferior, adversarial or cranky; or makes us feel trapped, or feels like evil. We then view this through the perspective of the associated function-attitude.

2)Others manifestations of these functions may trigger these memories, and affect us in kind. (i.e. according to the archetype, and it's functional perspective). Otherwise, they will be subject to how they fit the ego's goals (positively, no effect, etc).

3)We normally see the functional perspectives as "irrelevent" (or sometimes even have an aversion to them), and under stress, take them on in a rash, haphazard way. Again, the products of the undifferentiated functions do not have this effect on us when not in conflict with the ego.

4)We project them onto others, in which we see the other person as the archetype. (This can be either from them truly acting in a way that matches (resonates with) the archetypal complex, or likely more often, just our manufacturing the illusion of such when a situation somehow evokes it). We then react to them in the same way. (adversarial, critical, etc). The goal is to see these archetypes in ourselves rather than project them.

5)The positive effects surface more either in certain instances of stress when the primary counterparts cannot solve the problem. Otherwise, it is when we "own" the associated complexes and withdraw them, that we gain more conscious access to the functional perspectives. (And of course, there is also the "undifferentiated" normal everyday use of the function).

So this is how to understand when and when not these "uses" of the "other four" functions occur.
 

Noon

New member
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
790
What might cause someone to develop the Critical Parent over the Supportive?
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
What might cause someone to develop the Critical Parent over the Supportive?

Do you mean develop, as in get better at using, or just us it more frequently? In terms of using, the critical is kinked to the tertiary, as they are both of the same type( perceiving/judging) and direction (i/e).

The tertiary is often used excessively, leaving the auxillary underused. That's the tertiary temptation, of course, but I think that when it kicks in, it often brings the critical to the fore as well. The tertiary spawns doubt and the critical makes up excuses for the doubt quite often.

If you mean actually developing the critical into a function that is more useful than the auxillary... then I don't know. I'm not even sure if that is possible. Most of what I know about function theory seems to indicate that a strong auxillary is the keystone to developing the lower functions.
 

Noon

New member
Joined
Jul 23, 2010
Messages
790
Do you mean develop, as in get better at using, or just us it more frequently? In terms of using, the critical is kinked to the tertiary, as they are both of the same type( perceiving/judging) and direction (i/e).

The tertiary is often used excessively, leaving the auxillary underused. That's the tertiary temptation, of course, but I think that when it kicks in, it often brings the critical to the fore as well. The tertiary spawns doubt and the critical makes up excuses for the doubt quite often.

If you mean actually developing the critical into a function that is more useful than the auxillary... then I don't know. I'm not even sure if that is possible. Most of what I know about function theory seems to indicate that a strong auxillary is the keystone to developing the lower functions.

Thank you, Andy.

I'm not exactly sure whether it's more useful or just used more frequently.
I don't think it serves me as well as it serves ISJs... For instance, I don't relate to dependability, responsibility, accountability, repetition or stable routines. But I do relate to and enjoy being past referential, liking to operate from a base of known things, and easily recognizing what I am and am not familiar with. At the same time, I experience Si as also critical, mistake oriented, restrictive, and if in very large quantities, somewhat suffocating? I experience Se as more liberating and enjoyable (I also learn better the Se way), but too much of it and it will seem chaotic and dangerous...cue Si. :doh:

Right now, my most frequently used are Fi and Si.
 

Andy

Supreme High Commander
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
1,211
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Thank you, Andy.

I'm not exactly sure whether it's more useful or just used more frequently.
I don't think it serves me as well as it serves ISJs... For instance, I don't relate to dependability, responsibility, accountability, repetition or stable routines. But I do relate to and enjoy being past referential, liking to operate from a base of known things, and easily recognizing what I am and am not familiar with. At the same time, I experience Si as also critical, mistake oriented, restrictive, and if in very large quantities, somewhat suffocating? I experience Se as more liberating and enjoyable (I also learn better the Se way), but too much of it and it will seem chaotic and dangerous...cue Si. :doh:

Right now, my most frequently used are Fi and Si.

Yeah both the tertiary and critical tend to be a bit semifunctional. Sometimes they are useful ways of thinking, other times they just leg you and leave you eating dirt.

Hmmm... a semifunctional function? What an ugly term of phrase. I hate words, they always get in the way when I'm trying to say something.
 

Salomé

meh
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,527
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Later discussing this directly with both Lenore Thomson and Beebe, and then researching the concept of the shadow more, it is really sinking in that the way the answers to those questions is summed up, is that the archetypes (especially the shadows) are what we project onto others, and the goal of ego-development is to "own" them, and see them as apart of ourselves.
Interesting thread. Thanks for sharing this Eric.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
What might cause someone to develop the Critical Parent over the Supportive?
It's not really about "developing"; especially regarding the shadows. What people call "developing" is really differentiation or integration. And that just means bringing it into conscious more.
And then, there's:
I'm not exactly sure whether it's more useful or just used more frequently.
...that ol' term "using" functions, which some of us have turned away from, in favor of functions being perspectives.

What what you might be asking about is simply bringing a perspective more into consciousness.

So if you're talking about having more manifestations of critical Si, then that is likely not it being "developed" or brought into consciousness; you are just in situations where your critical parent is being triggered, and the feelings reach you by way of Si.

To bring it into consciousness would be a process of identifying the critical parent complex and its projections onto others, and recognizing it within yourself.

But then, what you describe might not even be an archetypal manifestation:
...enjoy being past referential, liking to operate from a base of known things, and easily recognizing what I am and am not familiar with.
This does not have to be a necessary Si perspective. (Here is where it is good to see functions as perspectives and not behaviors or skills).

Any type can engage in those traits fir different reasons. For your type, that sounds simply like the preferred Se. Really, Jung conceived of four functions, S, N, T and F, and the e/i only tells us the preferred source of the stimulation. So an Se type, being just as concrete as an Si type, will have memory and know what he is familiar with. He is just drawn to new emergent experience as well.
It can even be an Ni perspective, if you're abstracting meaning/patterns from the past data.

Interesting thread. Thanks for sharing this Eric.

You're welcome. :)
 

rowingineden

New member
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
107
MBTI Type
iNfp
Enneagram
9w1
7. Deceiving/Trickster - mischievous, wreaks havoc, circumvents obstacles, petulant; is not trustworthy when seen in other people; fools us into thinking something is important to do or pay attention to; compensates for the trust of the puer/puella and insulates against the cruelties of the world.

8. Devilish/Demon/Daimon - destructive to ourselves and others, undermines, often erupts violently; distorts trust in relationships, promotes chaos

Positives and Negatives of Each function

Primary
1. Dominant: + Leading, - Domineering
2. Auxiliary: + Supportive, - Overprotective
3. Tertiary: + Relief, - Unsettling
4. Inferior: + Aspirational, - Projective

Shadows
5. + Backup, - Opposing
6. + Discovery, - Critical
7. + Comedic, - Deceiving
8. + Transformative, - Devilish

Links for more research:

What are Archetypes?
The Jung Lexicon by Jungian analyst, Daryl Sharp, Toronto
Great Lakes APT : Beebe's 8 Functions
So:
Heroine - Fi (Definitely. Fi is my driving force, my flame.)
Mother - Ne (Very handy. I learn so much more at a much faster rate and so make the right connections because I have Ne going on.)
Child - Si (Shapes my Fi and Ne, when I am all vulnerable and stuff, Si gets activated. I friggin' hate this function, because my past sucks. I like to not be thinking about the past much.)
Anima - Te (Te is kinda a jerk. But handy for science, debate, etc.)
Opposing - Fe (Very useful. Learning this function has helped me get more stuff I want.)
Witch - Ni (This function took over for most of my childhood, which was a very rough period in my life.)
Trickster - Se (But... I like Se. It's so much more FUN than Si!)
Demon - Ti (Is it very bad that I seem to have a lot of Ti going on in this period of my life, then? Nah, it means I'm undergoing transformation, right? Sure.)
 

daviddwilson

Permabanned
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
1
MBTI Type
davi
Enneagram
davi
I did the functions test at Understanding the Eight Jungian Cognitive Processes / Eight Functions Attitudes a couple of times and the order of my functions seems to quite random, but follows Lenore's model to some slight degree.

1st - Ti - My Dominant - Excellent
2nd - Ne - My Auxilary - Excellent
3rd - Te - My Backup - Good/Average
4th - Fi - My Devillish - Average
5th - Si - My Tertiary - Average
6th - Se - My Trickster - Limited
7th - Ni - My Critical - Limited/Unused
8th - Fe - My Inferior - Unused

It almost seems that after developing your first two functions you either develop you Tertiary or Backup and cascade down from there finishing your develoment with your Devillish or your Inferior.

Just responding so I will know where to find this topic later. I am glad that I found this topic, because I have contemplated on creating one.

Athenian, I think Beebe's term for inferior function is different than what we most understand that term to be in general. Your inferior is actually something that you use well. You would have little or no use of Si. If you disagree with Beebe's theory, then do you prefer Lenore Thomson's lasagna? Thanks for starting this thread Protean.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
When I added the posts above about the complexes being about "projection", I knew there must be more to it, but at the time had just enough to build a working basic explanation of how they surface.
Continuing to research and put things together, and gaining more of a perspective from a discussion I've been having; I can now add more to this.

The shadow complexes are 'constellated' in response to specific threats to the ego. The ego has boundaries; both external ones (against all that is not self), and internal boundaries (between the conscious and unconscious). These boundaries are manifest as our defenses. Particularly against painful emotions that can be damaging to us. When these defenses are challenged, then the ego's integrity is at stake.

So from what I gather, the Opposing Personality is a reaction towards the ego and especially its heroic dominant perspective and persona being opposed or obstructed. Obstruction might also be when ego's connection with the anima is obstructed.

The Senex/Witch is the reaction against negation and vulnerability. Negation would seem to be a challenge to the parental authority of the auxiliary perspective, and vulnerability would be from threats to the child. Hence, this post
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5177&p=190859&viewfull=1#post190859 (from "A Closer Look at the Auxiliary Function") where intimidating the child triggers both the witch and trickster (which is the "mirroring" dynamic I have been discussing lately).

The Trickster is a reaction against being controlled or put upon. (child feels burdened, parent feels powerless).

Hence, here also, the Parent figures in tandem with the Trickster.
An example of the child being intimidated and the parent overwhelmed is like a 14 year old, where on one hand, the grownups are still saying you're too young for a whole bunch of rights they enjoy (negation); but on the other hand, you're now old enough for them to be putting more responsibilities on, and always saying "you're TOO OLD for..." whatever aspects of youth you're trying to hold on to. (most likely, shirking responsibilities, or using childish means of getting your way).

I called it the "vacuum" or "void" age. You would think we would have the best of adulthood and childhood, but instead, it seems like they're trying to give us the worst of both; the best of neither.

So at an age like 17, where you're still in this inbetween period, and given more responsibilities, but still not yet much of an adult's rights, you might point out "I'm old enough to go to war, but not to vote, drink, etc."
You use the double-standard to try to bind the other person.

The Demon is basically a reaction against a threat of ego death: the removal of its boundaries.
So, it might erupt when the ego feels totally helpless, especially when the anima is under strong attack.

The Demon and Trickster are also said to appear at times when there is danger of ego disintegration. This is when the ego's boundaries (mainly, in this case, its defenses) are breached. We would then be left defenseless agains damaging emotional content. So the larger Self dispatches these last stands to protect its integrity. This might occur during trauma, where demonic figures appear in dreams threatening to destroy you in some way, or the the person's ego might confuse itself to bind him from taking action that might expose him to more trauma.

From here, there is a debate as to whether these complexes surface only in those kinds of severe instances, or in everyday situations.
The way they were originally conceived is more the former, and our own Sim (formerly here, at least; still at Perc) is one who leaned that way. Beebe, of course, introduced the latter view.
For now, I believe it is a combination of both. You could say the everyday constellations of the complexes are miniscule versions, for when the ego's boundaries feel threatened in more miniscule, everyday ways, especially by emotional pain.

It is true, that the Trickster and Demon, as discussed by Donald Kalsched were originally more about trauma.
I have also seen a notion that the whole shadow (which originally to Jung was one single archetype) was more likely what we know as the Opposing Personality. Sort of like four-process theory, where the inferior is considered the whole shadow, this is basically a five-process theory.

I found this review of one of Kalsched's books by Beebe where he provides a bit of rationale for having four shadow complexes rather than them being "blurred into a master mythologem like Jung's dark Mercurius, who too easily becomes a metaphor for the whole shadow in all its shape-shifting aspects": http://www.global-elite.org/MKUltra/Donald Kalsched - The Inner World of Trauma.html)

Seeing now that the original concepts were about trauma made me have to consider if the Trickster and Demon were necessarily the best archetypes to assign to the negative child and negative anima roles. (There were actually hundreds of archetypes to choose from. The ones we discuss are just those Beebe chose to represent the ego's cognitive dynamics).

Still, for now, apparently, it seems there are miniscule versions of the energies that hail from this space for lesser threats, that are nevertheless seen as grave to the ego's position.

Hence, both the 7th and 8th functions as brain hemisphere lateral alternatives or "mirrors" of the dominant and aux, as well as shadows of the tertiary and inferior. (Even though it should be pointed out that Lenore Thomson does not take it this way; it's the connection of the two theories that I'm making).

Again, when these complexes are triggered, the feeling will likely reach us by way of the associated functions.
 
Last edited:

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Examples of the four shadows (and how the primary functions-complexes are involved in their constellation) with me:

When things are organized in a way that doesn't make sense, and especially if I am affected negatively by it, then I feel opposed or obstructed. Especially if I come up with some idea based on an extension of personal or even universal principles, and people reject it in favor of some agreed upon convention.

My inner sense of how things should be (hero Ti) is being violated, and I have noticed that I also often feel out of touch with life (anima Fe) for not being able to fit in with the program.
As I have pointed out here: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35245&p=1361764&viewfull=1#post1361764, the anima is about "otherness" and the aspects of life the ego cannot control. When Fe is anima, blows to the ego's dominant perspective will likely seem to make you feel inferior among people.

So to compensate, I project this oppositional complex on those involved, and may respond in kind.

I also feel negated, which then triggers this cranky perspective that fits the situation into negative, often archetypal patterns.
Like when some old building whose architecture I like (especially if it is unique in the context of the region it is built in) is torn down, it triggers a critical perception of the symbolic significance of the event (huge powerful corporations stomping out "the little people"; if the bulding was run down, it has "succumbed" to its decay, rather than being "redeemed"), and noone is destroying the rich and powerful's world (i.e. the developers) like that.

I then see other possibilities neglected (parent Ne) and memories or things that remind me of my fond memories disappearing (child Si).

So I then project this "critical" complex. It's this part of me that wants to believe every occurrence I don't like has some negative significance. I then look to blame someone for it.

This then brings to mind that standards often imposed onto me, which I am not allowed by those around me to violate. I then begin to point back at the things that offend me (or others) to prove a double-standard and thus bind either the person chastising me, or the person doing the same things I'm chastized for (which may very well be the same person!), and "reverse the expectations". The aim is to show them that they themselves need to produce what they are demanding from me.

This in my case involves simply the visible facts in the current moment.

I feel intimidated from remembering being chastized in the past (child Si) and I probably feel something is being expected of me that goes against my ego's sense of authority or what I WANT to be helpful to others with (parent Ne).
So it switches to its right brain alternative.

As for the Demon, I'm wondering, about myself; as an Aspie who was never understood by the people around me. So they try to shake you up by trying to make you conscious of the things you are not conscious of, and in a way not done with other people. You need "more help" with your life skills. (And the "unfairness" between how you're treated compared to others is noticed).
So I'm thinking that this results in the normal ego boundaries being constantly battered, and you become aware of your flaws, but can only do so much about them, and at the same time, wonder why other people are allowed to have their flaws and get away with them, and take on a massive sense of injustice you feel passionately about. Not only is it a serious blow to anima Fe that wants to fit in, but it so totally doesn't make sense to hero/persona Ti.
 

daviidwilson

Permabanned
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
2
MBTI Type
davi
Enneagram
davi
The thing about those structures is that they're probably all right, because no one develops in the same way.

I think the development might be different for each person. I don't the system can be defined outside of itself. Although I would say that the patter of functional development for me feels more like:
 

daviidwilson

Permabanned
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Messages
2
MBTI Type
davi
Enneagram
davi
For me, I think, it was

  • 0-3 years old : Domimant/Backup
  • 3-10 years old : Dominant/Discovery/Relief
  • 10-13 years old : Dominant/Auxiliary/Discovery
  • 13-18 years old : Transformational/Dominant/Aspirational
  • 18-22 years old : Auxiliary/Comedic
  • 22 years old-Now: Auxiliary/Relief/Backup/Aspirational

It almost seems that after developing your first two functions you either develop you Tertiary or Backup and cascade down from there finishing your develoment with your Devillish or your Inferior.
 

Srho

New member
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
88
MBTI Type
INFX
That's a cool thing you found! I got Fi>Ni>Ti>Ne>Fe>Si>Te>Se.
Agree, every onedevelops differently. But it's still fun, hehe.
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
Just added this new "mirror" illustration.
mirror.png

While the other one I did showed how all the functions are really just projections of the dominant and auxiliary, this one shows how the four shadows are reflections of the first four. Hence, the Dom/aux become # 7 and 8, which are also the brain lateral alternatives, the tertiary or Puer becomes the Witch/Senex (and the Senex actually in the original conception of the archetypes was the shadow of the Puer, rather than of the Good Parent as it is in this theory). Anima/animus becomes the Opposing Personality, as ahown by both being contrasexual.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
Never actually been in this thread... lot of information here... what's the story about the five people in here with very few posts (four under 10; the other under 25) who have all been banned? was it Jack Flak making dupe accounts?
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
You could check the Banned and the Damned thread. Though they don't always say who the dupe account was, or even exactly what the person did.
------------

This new illustration features a number of the symmetries inherent in the system, and I didn't even particularly plan it that way.
I chose a one-sided arrow, because it could be rotated and reversed and look different in all of the resultant eight positions.

The "Hero" happens to look like a "1" (not intended), but then this is good, as it represents the ego, and looks out for "Number One" as it is put.
It is pointing upward, and facing forward (left in this case). Upward then represents the ego's orientation (e or i), while forward represents the ego's preferred perspective. The Auxiliary, or Parent is pointing forward but downward. The tertiary and inferior are the reverse of these, and the shadows (reflections) are aligned the same vertially, but rotated horizontally. The OP and Witch Senex are reflected from the backward facing child and inferior, and thus end up facing forward like the dom and aux. (again, left).
The spines point up and down, while the arms are lying horizontally. (That also was not intended, but just fell into place!)
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
In coming to understand the functions in terms of emotions:
http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...2-understanding-functions-terms-emotions.html
I have gained a further understanding of the dynamic of how functions are "used" so to speak, but the ego.

To repeat, the functions convert emotional responses into cognitive data. The functions that best maintain a feeling of control between emotions and the rational mind, will be those we consciously prefer.

This also helps me rephrase the definition of the shadows I had earlier proposed.

The Self tries to bring the shadow perspectives into consciousness, and the ego resists this, trying to keep them out of consciousness when they go against the ego's goals. When they do come into consciousness against the ego's wishes, it will often take the form of an erratic reaction, often responding in kind through the perspective of the function, or behaviors associated with it. This is what would be commonly misconstrued as "uses of shadow functions", "irritation" by certain functions, "allergic reactions", etc.
What happens in midlife, is that when the ego grows a bit bored of seeing life through its lifelong perspectives (seeing they haven't really solved the pains of life), it weakens its defenses, and the suppressed perspectives are able to come into consciousness more. The ego can either continue trying to resist, or instead become more open to them. (Hence, it's not a matter of the functions automatically "developing" like the first four did). This is what is supposed to lead towards "individuation".
The "traumatic" occasions, described by Donald Kalsched, are special instances of the Trickster and Demon, where the Self now tries to keep damaging information out of consciousness, despite whatever the ego is trying to do with it.

Anyone can do these things using the functional perspectives, but for the type with that function connected to that archetype, there will be a heightened emotional investment in the action or reaction, as the function translates the emotional responses involving the complex into cognitive information.
 
Last edited:
Top