## User Tag List

1. Originally Posted by poki
I went through the same thought process as you several months ago. And came to the same conclusion, but I have changed. Sorry experience is what brought me to this new thought, not logic. Good luck trying to use logic to get me to think different.
Ok well I won't waste my time then. Your experience shows you that Ti users do things that appear Fi and vice versa, I'm sure, but SW and I have already explained how different functions can be used to reach the same conclusions and/or yield the same behaviors as Ti and Fi. However, if you want to be stuck in your own arbitrary frame of reference with no impersonal external backing, then go for it.

2. Originally Posted by Eric B
Let's not forget the shadows! Everyone does use all eight processes, only the last four or five are rejected by the consciousness, and hence not normally used, but do come up in certain situations (good and bad). The first four can degrade directly to their shadow counterpart (with the attitude reversed), and also, the first two can do the right or left brain switch, and keep the same attitude, but reverse the function. For an Fi user, that would be Ti.

If you understand that there are really only four functions (SNTF; no i/e yet), which an ego uses in an internal or external way (simulating the "Xi/e"), then it figures how the shadows will play out for each type.
T and F are just two sides of the "rational" (J) coin, and S and N are two sides of the a-rational (P) coin. And then if these function coins are split along the edge into separate coins in themselves, the different orientations of them are just different sides of those coins. While Jung did later make introversion and extraversion essentially properties of the functions (such that I/E became little more than "the dominant function attitude"), initially, they were properties of the ego. It's the ego that chooses an internal or external preference.
Honestly I've never really bought into or fully understood the whole shadow thing. Are you saying that our unconscious uses the other 4 shadow functions?

3. Originally Posted by teslashock
Honestly I've never really bought into or fully understood the whole shadow thing. Are you saying that our unconscious uses the other 4 shadow functions?
When what our brain is used to isn't working anymore, and escaping the situation is impossible, it tends to throw anything else it's got at it. Since this situation tends to be highly stressful, and these cognitive pathways not used very often, it tends to express itself in a fairly unpleasant fashion.

4. Originally Posted by onemoretime
When what our brain is used to isn't working anymore, and escaping the situation is impossible, it tends to throw anything else it's got at it. Since this situation tends to be highly stressful, and these cognitive pathways not used very often, it tends to express itself in a fairly unpleasant fashion.
Ok, so maybe when we are under high levels of stress we use the other 4 functions. That's not really pertinent though, as we aren't our usual "cognitive selves" under situations of high stress. You found a special example that's not really applicable to a very expansive whole, so you of all people must not find it particularly relevant. Why bother even sharing it?

5. Originally Posted by teslashock
Ok, so maybe when we are under high levels of stress we use the other 4 functions. That's not really pertinent though, as we aren't our usual "cognitive selves" under situations of high stress. You found a special example that's not really applicable to a very expansive whole, so you of all people must not find it particularly relevant. Why bother even sharing it?
It's still part of our psychological profiles. It's like having to write with your left hand when your right hand is cramped - sure, it doesn't work very well at first, but it's still there, and it's worth exercising so when you DO have to use it, you can use it more effectively.

This also has to do with why NT and NF are two groupings, while SJ and SP are the other two. NTs tend to use Ne, Ni, Te and Ti fairly effectively, while NFs do the same substituting Fe and Fi for the last two (Keirsey's thoughts). Meanwhile, sensors tend to use both sensing functions fairly effectively.

6. Originally Posted by teslashock
Ok well I won't waste my time then. Your experience shows you that Ti users do things that appear Fi and vice versa, I'm sure, but SW and I have already explained how different functions can be used to reach the same conclusions and/or yield the same behaviors as Ti and Fi. However, if you want to be stuck in your own arbitrary frame of reference with no impersonal external backing, then go for it.
lol, I can argue that your in your own external arbitrary framework with no internal backing.

You see no conclusion was reached, nor external appearance, nor decision with my experience. Maybe if you could get out or your "external framework" you would realize there is more to life then what happens on the outside While a decision is definite, the process is not definite as you have so many things to weigh.

To explain my experience, its like trying to merge digital logic with an analog signal to work on making a decision.

7. Originally Posted by onemoretime
It's still part of our psychological profiles. It's like having to write with your left hand when your right hand is cramped - sure, it doesn't work very well at first, but it's still there, and it's worth exercising so when you DO have to use it, you can use it more effectively.
I don't know if I agree with the claim that we HAVE to use the other 4 functions in times of desperation. I may agree that we do use them in times of serious stress, as at these times, our actions do not correlate to our typical personalities. But as far as it being an obligatory means of solving a desperate problem, I can't say that I agree with that. I think a balanced mixture of the 4 functions alone is enough to solve any problem.

Again, I still don't see how our use of the 4 shadow functions in times of desperation is particularly pertinent when it comes to evaluating our personalities, as the way we deal with desperate situations doesn't really align with our true selves. We are basically acting off of primitive and involuntary whims at that point, not serious thought processes.

8. Originally Posted by poki
lol, I can argue that your in your own external arbitrary framework with no internal backing.

You see no conclusion was reached, nor external appearance, nor decision with my experience. Maybe if you could get out or your "external framework" you would realize there is more to life then what happens on the outside While a decision is definite, the process is not definite as you have so many things to weigh.

To explain my experience, its like trying to merge digital logic with an analog signal to work on making a decision.
Wtf are you talking about? My arguments were not based off of external experience. They were based off of logical and abstract conceptualizations. How can you say that I need to be more internal when the basis of my argument was a more a priori approach? You're the one arguing based off of experience and what's happening on the outside, not me.

9. Originally Posted by teslashock
I don't know if I agree with the claim that we HAVE to use the other 4 functions in times of desperation. I may agree that we do use them in times of serious stress, as at these times, our actions do not correlate to our typical personalities. But as far as it being an obligatory means of solving a desperate problem, I can't say that I agree with that. I think a balanced mixture of the 4 functions alone is enough to solve any problem.

Again, I still don't see how our use of the 4 shadow functions in times of desperation is particularly pertinent when it comes to evaluating our personalities, as the way we deal with desperate situations doesn't really align with our true selves. We are basically acting off of primitive and involuntary whims at that point, not serious thought processes.
It isn't just stress: depression can also evoke similar reactions. We're a lot more the product of our environment than we often like to admit.

10. Originally Posted by onemoretime
It isn't just stress: depression can also evoke similar reactions. We're a lot more the product of our environment than we often like to admit.
I'm still going to argue that under times of stress or psychological illness, we are not actually our selves. But I think we are about to be having an argument of semantics or an otherwise silly philosophical argument about what the self is.

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•