NiFi Loop

[Eric B]

And what exactly makes it worse?

The shadows are worse, because they are suppressed areas of consciousness. They come up under stress, often in an erratic fashion.

 

[rav3n]

If you're conscious of shadow, why is it so "bad"? If anything, shadow is worth assimilating even if it makes you a nutjob for awhile. Assimilation could give you an almost three dimensional view which can only strengthen your primary strengths. From a "T" perspective, both Te and Ti view can be dare I say, logisized? (Beat me with a wet noodle for mangling a word, go ahead!)

Not a fan of complete opposite assimilations, like trying to incorporate too much feeling in your decision-making process. If anything, this would cause greater conflict and for Fi-users, internal harmony is important especially if attempting objective thought is a priority value.

Or maybe I'm full of poop, rationalising the impossible. And yet Jung too, felt it was possible.

 

[Zarathustra]

I’ve done a good amount of thinking on the idea of loops over the last year or so, and here are some of my observations:

1. First, you have to figure out whether you want to define a loop as something inherently problematic or not. I would advise going with the route of it not being inherently problematic: that it can have both positive and negative sides to it.
   
   
2. Second, I would recommend you figure out whether there's any difference between the idea of two functions of the same attitudinal direction working in conjunction with one another and the idea of a loop existing between those two functions. I would suggest there is, but I'm not quite certain what the distinguishing characteristic(s) would be. The first two that come to mind are: 1) a relationship of high degree (with a loop signifying two functions with same attitudinal direction working in tandem with one another to a high degree), and 2) the notion that there is some sort of feedback loop/response/dynamic that is going on between the two functions, causing each of them to function in a way that would not be expected of them if they were not acting in a loop (i.e, acting either solo or in conjunction with another function [of either attitudinal direction] in a non-loop dynamic). These two distinctions are not mutually exclusive, and I guess the latter is really the more important of the two, as the former is more or less a byproduct of the latter.
   
   (Side note: one could postulate that a low-degree feedback loop might exist, but it might be hard to distinguish such a low-degree loop from a normal working dynamic between two functions, not to mention the fact that any low-degree dynamic between two functions [whether of the same attitudinal direction or different attitudinal direction, and regardless of whether they represent a loop] would be hard to discover/recognize/notice in the first place, due to its low degree, and that, if the loop is of a low-degree, then we must ask ourselves whether there really is a feedback loop/response/dynamic in play in the first place… [as one would expect a loop to likely continually increase in degree so long as the dynamic continues])
   
   
3. Third, I think it should be mentioned that an Ni+Fi (or NiFi) loop should be distinguished from a Fi+Ni (or FiNi) loop (and the same would go for all the other possible loop combinations). One would expect the two loops to be rather similar, but due to the fact that the more dominant process in one is different than the more dominant process in the other (and the same obviously goes for the less dominant processes in each), one might also reasonably expect there to be some kind of difference between the two. I have not spent enough time exploring this idea, but I do think it holds some water.
   
   
4. Fourth, the idea of a loop is regaled by some and reviled by others, and the reason for the difference in opinion seems to split along the lines of what I have dubbed the strict constructionist vs. loose constructionist divide: i.e., the divide between people who believe in the eight cognitive functions but doubt the dominant model of functional ordering/stacking and those who believe in both the eight cognitive functions and the dominant model of functional ordering/stacking.

Anyway, with those notes having been made, the Ni+Fi loop is the dominant loop for the INTJ, and the auxiliary loop for the ENTJ...

(I wrote this all in a word doc a couple weeks ago, but never finished it; I figure I might as well put it out there; maybe I'll finish it later.)

 

[Sunny Ghost]

^ concerning Fi/Ni and Ni/Fi loops, they are bundled together because in the negative loop theory you are using each of these two functions to a similar degree. Fi is just as high as Ni and vice versa. Also, it becomes negative when you don't balance it out with an extroverted function. The extroverted functions are necessary to the introverted functions and vice versa, otherwise a person becomes incredibly unbalanced. If they are an extrovert and relying too heavily on say Ne and Te, but not enough Fi, you can expect that person to feel lost and disconnected from their own self. Ne and Te start waging war on the exterior of this person and the interior world drifts farther away.

I'd have to hear actual examples of how looping can be positive and not negative. I've experienced negative looping and can only see it in that light, unless you want to be a real optimist and say I learned a thing or two from the experience.

 

[Eric B]

If you're conscious of shadow, why is it so "bad"? If anything, shadow is worth assimilating even if it makes you a nutjob for awhile. Assimilation could give you an almost three dimensional view which can only strengthen your primary strengths.

Well, the whole problem of the shadow is that most people are not conscious of it. They have not assimilated it. So it comes up in a rash, negative fashion.

 

[Zarathustra]

Well, the whole problem of the shadow is that most people are not conscious of it. They have not assimilated it. So it comes up in a rash, negative fashion.

Are we talking about Jung's idea of the shadow, or the idea of the shadow the we always talk about on here (INTJ/ENTP, INTP/ENTJ, ISFP/ESFJ, etc.)?

And is Jung's idea of the shadow necessarily even related to typology and the shadow functions?

 

[Eric B]

Well, the stuff we talk about here is based on Jung, because those type pairs are those whose primary functions are in each others' shadow. The shadow is what the ego suppresses from consciousness, and those functions considered "shadow" are the ones most suppressed by the ego.
So what I was saying, was that the ENTP's NeTiFeSi are normally suppressed to the INTJ, so if they do come up, they will often be rash.
An INTJ might get into an NiFi loop, and it might be a bit problematic, because it is an overly introverted cycle that lacks for the external input Te is supposed to provide.

But that same NiFi loop will be even more problematic for the ENTP, because those are the totally suppressed functions for him. So when they come up, they will likely be even more unhealthy.

 

[rav3n]

Are we talking about Jung's idea of the shadow, or the idea of the shadow the we always talk about on here (INTJ/ENTP, INTP/ENTJ, ISFP/ESFJ, etc.)?

And is Jung's idea of the shadow necessarily even related to typology and the shadow functions?

Isn't Jung's idea of shadow where Beebe draws some of his inspiration from (not that I can take Beebe's work to heart or mind)?

 

[uumlau]

Jung considered all of the functions that were not yet differentiated to part of the "shadow."

If one adopts the function orders that are commonly used (e.g., INTJ = Ni, Te, Fi, Se), then these "loops" have nothing to do with the shadow, but might involve an undifferentiated function. After all, INTJs don't appear to have "Si+Ti" issues. So, continuing with the INTJ example, then Ni is differentiated, and Fi may or may not be differentiated. The "loop" concept comes from neither Ni nor Fi being extroverted, so if the "solution" to the "Ni Fi problem" lies outside of oneself, one will continue to "loop" internally, never arriving at a valid conclusion. Similarly, for ENTP, if the solution to an "Ne Fe problem" lies inside of oneself, one will continue to "loop" externally, never arriving at a valid conclusion. In most modern MBTI theory, the "problems" of a type lie in the lack of differentiation/development of the auxiliary function (Te for the INTJ), which means that one is either extremely introverted and thus lacks a reasonable grounding in objective reality, or extremely extroverted and lacks self-understanding.

If one actually differentiates the functions involved, the "loop" aspect disappears. Ni+Fi can be a source of (subjective) wisdom, balanced by solid Te logic, and Ne+Fe can be a strong empirical appreciation of people, balanced by an internal Ti ideal.

 

[sculpting]

If you're conscious of shadow, why is it so "bad"? If anything, shadow is worth assimilating even if it makes you a nutjob for awhile. Assimilation could give you an almost three dimensional view which can only strengthen your primary strengths. From a "T" perspective, both Te and Ti view can be dare I say, logisized? (Beat me with a wet noodle for mangling a word, go ahead!)

Not a fan of complete opposite assimilations, like trying to incorporate too much feeling in your decision-making process. If anything, this would cause greater conflict and for Fi-users, internal harmony is important especially if attempting objective thought is a priority value.

Or maybe I'm full of poop, rationalising the impossible. And yet Jung too, felt it was possible.

From what I have seen, when the shadowy parts emerge-they do so in ways that are not productive. By being aware that what you are working through is a shadow-it allows you to recognize it as such and choose more consciously if you want to allow the shadow to part to continue emerging. If you choose to allow it to emerge, it also allows you to practice learning to use those aspects of self more productively. I suppose-by recognizing the shadow-it becomes less of a shadow. In typically Ni fashion, Jung seemed very hesitant to tie this to any concrete typological foundation-at least in the texts I have read. I suspect he recognized that shadows/complexes are highly individualized, regardless of type.

However it seems that when I try and use Fe-even in tiny bits-the answers given up by my mind violate my own internal Fi values-thus just create frustration and angst.

^ concerning Fi/Ni and Ni/Fi loops, they are bundled together because in the negative loop theory you are using each of these two functions to a similar degree. Fi is just as high as Ni and vice versa. Also, it becomes negative when you don't balance it out with an extroverted function. The extroverted functions are necessary to the introverted functions and vice versa, otherwise a person becomes incredibly unbalanced. If they are an extrovert and relying too heavily on say Ne and Te, but not enough Fi, you can expect that person to feel lost and disconnected from their own self. Ne and Te start waging war on the exterior of this person and the interior world drifts farther away.

I'd have to hear actual examples of how looping can be positive and not negative. I've experienced negative looping and can only see it in that light, unless you want to be a real optimist and say I learned a thing or two from the experience.

Do you guys think looping is the same thing as overdevelopment or equal development of the aux-tert functions? I seem to be able to recognize both in myself at times and consider myself NeTeFi. If stuck in a loop long enough, would one emerge with permanently altered development? (well at least till the aux catches up a bit later).. I dont feel a sense of lost self, but rather am very wary of emotional exposure choosing logical approaches if possible, but once emotions or values are exposed I am very sensitive and too caring and ridiculously niave.

 

[Sunny Ghost]

^i believe looping is equal development of primary and tertiary, with auxiliary not playing it's proper role of balancing extroverted and introverted functions. thus the reason it's damaging on perception, experience and personality.

i don't know that it would have permanent effects. once you balance yourself out with the auxiliary, you began to feel balanced.

i was stuck in the Fi/Ni loop, and once i focused my attention more on Se, i felt considerably happier and more sane.

 

[sculpting]

Yeah I dunno, I feel like I really want to look at them as two different things. I suppose this is because I see so many ENFPs, especially the males, or ones in science with well developed Te. I also see a ton of INFJs with well developed Ti. ENTPs with well developed Fe are almost the norm. The folks dont seem broken or unhappy-but you can see at times they are torn by those two judging functions. It is such a common thing that the MBTI step II designates mixed leadership styles as making up about 10-15% of the population with ENTPs and ENFPs in the lead statistically.

But at the same time that can go overboard. As an ENFP it feels "burnt" inside and very bitter. That to me is what my Ne-Te loop feels like...

 

[Sunny Ghost]

Yeah I dunno, I feel like I really want to look at them as two different things. I suppose this is because I see so many ENFPs, especially the males, or ones in science with well developed Te. I also see a ton of INFJs with well developed Ti. ENTPs with well developed Fe are almost the norm. The folks dont seem broken or unhappy-but you can see at times they are torn by those two judging functions. It is such a common thing that the MBTI step II designates mixed leadership styles as making up about 10-15% of the population with ENTPs and ENFPs in the lead statistically.

But at the same time that can go overboard. As an ENFP it feels "burnt" inside and very bitter. That to me is what my Ne-Te loop feels like...

i don't think a well developed tertiary automatically equals looping or being unbalanced. rather, the dependence on two functions focused in one direction (extroverted or introverted) versus balance causes looping.... allowing the aux to diminish or weaken.

one can still have a strong tertiary, but have an equally strong aux along with the primary. humans definitely do develop their other cognitive functions as they get older and mature, so having a well developed tertiary is fine... and actually very healthy. it's just when there's too much focus on introversion or too much focus on extroversion that one becomes unbalanced.

 

[skylights]

i don't know if this will be true for you, Metaphor, but when i go into Ne-Te heavy processing, pinning down Fi seems to be helpful, and when i edge near Fi-Si heavy processing, engaging Ne seems to be the most helpful. i think the important thing in both of these cases is to engage the opposite of the function that i'm lost in - obviously switching I/E, but also switching J/P in correlation with whichever is stronger in the duo (J in the case of Ne-Te because P is stronger; P in the case of Fi-Si because J is stronger). perhaps leaning on Te would be helpful for you - to me, in these situations, i feel like i sort of have to "suspend" the way i want to think about the situation at the time, and just do what seems undesirable but healthier.

that is, of course, assuming that you would prefer to end the "loop". but perhaps different cognitive functioning can bring new insights...

Third, I think it should be mentioned that an Ni+Fi (or NiFi) loop should be distinguished from a Fi+Ni (or FiNi) loop (and the same would go for all the other possible loop combinations). One would expect the two loops to be rather similar, but due to the fact that the more dominant process in one is different than the more dominant process in the other (and the same obviously goes for the less dominant processes in each), one might also reasonably expect there to be some kind of difference between the two. I have not spent enough time exploring this idea, but I do think it holds some water.

agreed... i tend to think whichever function is stronger in the pair tends to be the driving force, whereas the weaker function is like an amp giving feedback. but it's not always helpful feedback, because it's not moderated by both internal and external information. this is kind of off the top of my head, but i'm thinking that the difference would be something like: while a Ne-Te process is driven by the motivation of creating more possibilities via getting things done, a Te-Ne process will be driven by the motivation of getting things done via creating more possibilities. The issue with both loops is there's no internal regulation - in Ne-Te there's no Fi there to alert you when generating new possibilities isn't a very healthy response to a certain situation, and in Te-Ne there's no Fi there to alert you when organizing and directing isn't a very healthy action in a certain situation.

Do you guys think looping is the same thing as overdevelopment or equal development of the aux-tert functions?

no... but i think equal development of the tert or underdevelopment of the aux could make you slip into dom-tert looping more easily. (edit - exactly what IndyAnnaJoan said)

Yes, I do feel lost, especially being a J. Looking for meaning and not finding it, since there are no truths. Don't know how you Ps stand this!

it's not as groundless and shifting as it sounds, because we're strongly anchored internally. if you're a fan of functional roles, it might be helpful to consider that Fi is your tertiary / relief role, whereas it's my auxiliary / supportive role, and those are nearly opposite in terms of their character, with the auxiliary being a "parent" and the tertiary being a "child". essentially your Hero (dominant) is acting without guidance, receiving feedback from the creative Child, and acting without guidance again. normally the Child is helpful because it's a very different way of looking at things and it pairs easily with your dom and does not conflict with your aux, because it's applied to a different realm, and thus it "relieves" your Hero and Supportive Parent from some of their burdens (my tert usually seems to manifest in a "simplifying" role) but without touching base with the aux/Parent too, the dom/Hero doesn't get any input from the opposite E/I realm. so basically a dom-tert loop is naturally going to feel like it lacks steady ground, because you're missing the input of the guiding parent to slow down your dom when it's getting ahead of itself.

 

[InvisibleJim]

I don't believe in dominant/tertiary looping. How can you both have a fixed and a malleable internal definition at the same time?

In the INTJ case what you are seeing is surely Fi-Se: the internal definition becomes fixed to protect the view of self and the feeling of control over the environment evaporates to dissociates from Te to Se.

Hence why similar grumpy/angry and occasionally ecstatic behaviour can be encountered as either a demoting of Ni-Te or as a consequence of excessive Fi-Se.

 

[sculpting]

I don't believe in dominant/tertiary looping. How can you both have a fixed and a malleable internal definition at the same time?

In the INTJ case what you are seeing is surely Fi-Se: the internal definition becomes fixed to protect the view of self and the feeling of control over the environment evaporates to dissociates from Te to Se.

Hence why similar grumpy/angry and occasionally ecstatic behaviour can be encountered as either a demoting of Ni-Te or as a consequence of excessive Fi-Se.

Could you have developed each of the functions to some level of maturity-the fixed definition-but then due to external stressors, resort to the loop in a protective way-the malleable version? As an enfp, Fi seems to be a feedback loop that receives Ne input. Too much externally routed pain from others sort of burns out the Fi emapthic capabilities-nothing I can do will resolve the hurt of others, but I am still trapped feeling their pain-thus in a protective manner I shut down Fi and resort to Te. It is accompanied by a cute little Fi-Si loop of "change is EVIL" typically. I dunno what the NTJ equiv would be....

 

[InvisibleJim]

Could you have developed each of the functions to some level of maturity-the fixed definition-but then due to external stressors, resort to the loop in a protective way-the malleable version? As an enfp, Fi seems to be a feedback loop that receives Ne input. Too much externally routed pain from others sort of burns out the Fi emapthic capabilities-nothing I can do will resolve the hurt of others, but I am still trapped feeling their pain-thus in a protective manner I shut down Fi and resort to Te. It is accompanied by a cute little Fi-Si loop of "change is EVIL" typically. I dunno what the NTJ equiv would be....

Isn't this merely the temporary position until Te-Si takes hold and the ENFP locks themselves in a secluded/isolated room until they have evaluated all of the information available to feed back to the more normal Fi internal definition?

 

[sculpting]

Isn't this merely the temporary position until Te-Si takes hold and the ENFP locks themselves in a secluded/isolated room until they have evaluated all of the information available to feed back to the more normal Fi internal definition?

This may be true...let me think on it.

 

[Automator]

Loss of reality and functionality. Borderline paranoid schizophrenic. Stagnation. Anyone see the Jared Loughner's youtube videos? Yeah, not good.

 

[uumlau]

Loss of reality and functionality. Borderline paranoid schizophrenic. Stagnation. Anyone see the Jared Loughner's youtube videos? Yeah, not good.

There is a problem with mapping mental illness, especially severe mental illness, to any particular personality type or set of Jungian functions. Yes, there might be a credible similarity between healthy individuals of whatever type/functions with mild tendencies in such regards and the typical behaviors of those with the mental illness, but that's only begging the question: is the mental illness an extreme example of that type/functionality, OR does the mental illness cause people of whatever type/functionality to behave that way, for reasons having little to do with typology?

A normal (healthy) Ni-dom (INxJ) is recognized as such due to the remarkable way in which one taps into the unconscious and skillfully finds new and useful ideas that don't usually occur to those of other types. Another individual who comes up with insane ideas/motivations that demonstrate a weak grasp of reality might say random things that resemble tapping into one's unconscious, but the severe lack of skill in so doing would normally suggest that the individual isn't an Ni-dom.

There might be a connection between Ni (and/or Fi) and such extreme behavior, but it is not an area of typology that lends itself to serious study.