• 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.

What's the consensus on the use of shadow functions?

Thunderbringer

New member
Joined
Jul 6, 2010
Messages
274
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
6w7
The idea that we're actually accessing all the functions will certainly be a problem for the "I hate, loathe and despise Fe - it is a vile piece of slime on the face of the universe" squad!

There's only one douchebag I can think of that constantly says this.

See, it takes a strong Fi to make such a powerful statement. Proof that both functions aren't used equally! ;)
However there are also other factors that can make you "seem" to use a function more than you should. Insecure and fearful people might appear to use Fe, but that could be only because they'd rather accomodate with other people than risk harm to themselves.

Not necessarily. As an Fi-dom, I have pretty good Fe. I find that in most situations, my personal beliefs and ethics aren't called into play so I just go along with the group because there's no need to act like a douchebag and start trying to be as "individualistic" as possible. In the cases that are really personal, however, I won't back down with my Fi and can seem selfish to to others but that doesn't really happen a lot.
 
S

Society

Guest
God, yes; thank you. I have always identified with descriptions for both Ne and Ni. Whether or not I am actually reaally attuned to Ni in the way that Ni users are said to be is a different matter, but I would just go back to my principle of 'walks like a duck.' It's true that Ne and Ni are conceptually different; one is divergent and the other is convergent, so on and so forth. But the truth is that many of us identify with both, and we may as well reconcile reality with our theory. (On the other hand, it should be noted that some Ne-dominants do not identify with Ni at all.)

I can say that I 'synthesize' Ni through Ne and Ti, or.. whatever, but why not just call it Ni? In general, why not call it being oriented to intuition? Why not call it something along the lines of openness? Socionics realizes that 'Ne users' can 'be attuned to Ni,' so why can't we as adherents of MBTI embrace that concept as well?

Ni may not be an Ne user's default, primary way of navigating the world, but to claim that the so-called shadow functions are completely out of reach is ridiculous. To claim that they're out of conscious reach is less ridiculous, but still kinda ridiculous.

This also indicates that the types ought to be defined by their default, primary ways of navigating the world, that they ought to strive for reaching beyond these primary ways, but that they should not be limited to these primary ways. For example, hardcore Ne-dominants may neglect thinking and feeling, and may very well repress sensing. (This means that, say, they may start enterprises without reaping their benefits or seeing them through.) Jung himself says as such. To me, they ought to recognize this and work on it.

Same applies for all of the functions and types, of course.
if we are right, then a better desrcirption system would be more like this: make one direction the zero and determine where the function stands between zero and a 100.. let's say, introversion being zero, thus calculate the percentage of how extraverted a function is.

so instead of giving a value for each function's direction, it would be more like:
N% (E%)
T% (E%)
F% (E%)
S% (E%)
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
My point is that they'd be working against each other. It's one thing to say the two types can follow and understand the other, but a different thing to prefer both at the same time. Ne doms don't seem to get tied down to a specific perception or meaning. They keep pursuing and indulge in possibilities. NJs are more focused.. and once they are focused, they'll take a dump on other possibilities. In their minds, they've already gone through them.

I think so.

As much as I like her book, I don't really believe in Lenore Thompson's view of the shadow functions. ITJs - they prefer Fi. That's what they "use". Fe is a really big stretch for them. IFJs prefer Fe. ENFPs prefer Ne and Te. That's what they use. So yeah, I don't think we use the shadow functions very much at all if we're operating in a healthy state.

If we do use them, I think the lower down the stack you go, the more difficult it is to access them or it's increasingly disfunctional to use them.
 
S

Society

Guest
My point is that they'd be working against each other. It's one thing to say the two types can follow and understand the other, but a different thing to prefer both at the same time. Ne doms don't seem to get tied down to a specific perception or meaning. They keep pursuing and indulge in possibilities. NJs are more focused.. and once they are focused, they'll take a dump on other possibilities. In their minds, they've already gone through them.

people with extremely introverted intuitions (no Ne) might get tied down to the speciic meaning and underlining principles, but that's not because of their Ni - all the Ni did was figure out those meanings and underlining principles - it was their lack of Ne that brought them to not think of other possibilities. not all Ni doms are like that - plenty have a very well developed Ne on the side.
 

Lady_X

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 27, 2008
Messages
18,235
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
784
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
i test high in both ne and ni and sort of fi and fe...so...does that mean that i'm basically just a major intuitive feeling person...or...do the test questions just suck?
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
i test high in both ne and ni and sort of fi and fe...so...does that mean that i'm basically just a major intuitive feeling person...or...do the test questions just suck?

Test questions suck.

You're ENFP.
 
G

garbage

Guest
i test high in both ne and ni and sort of fi and fe...so...does that mean that i'm basically just a major intuitive feeling person...or...do the test questions just suck?
False dichotomy. A third option is that the theory sucks. :wink:

We conflate 'skills' and 'preferences' way, way too much. I'm sure that you can be skilled at all four of those functions.

The test sucks at determining what we're truly attuned to. But I'm not so sure that measuring what we're truly attuned to is useful or even accurate.

If Ne, Ni, Fi, and Fe all resonate with you, don't let a test or theory hold you back from being attuned to them.

My point is that they'd be working against each other. It's one thing to say the two types can follow and understand the other, but a different thing to prefer both at the same time. Ne doms don't seem to get tied down to a specific perception or meaning. They keep pursuing and indulge in possibilities. NJs are more focused.. and once they are focused, they'll take a dump on other possibilities. In their minds, they've already gone through them.

Now, this is true. But I think what [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION] was calling out as ridiculous was not being able to be strong in both, which is different than preferring both.

It seems that Ne and Ni would work against each other, for sure. But that doesn't mean that a so-called Ne dominant is an incapable baby when it comes to honing in on a likely possibility or that he is necessarily unskilled in doing so.

Moreover, to say that an Ne dominant is not necessarily attuned to looking for 'what is really going on,' which is typically regarded as a manifestation of Ni, is severely limiting. (..especially to an Ne-dominant who also happens to be an Enneagram 6..)
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
Fair enough. As for tests, I think we'd be better off with the version 1.0 of that cognitive test. I wrote to him about it, but he said people complained about the Ni questions being too odd (can't find an archive atm, so I can't give an example). I think less people would score highly because of that though.
 
S

Society

Guest
False dichotomy. A third option is that the theory sucks. :wink:

If Ne, Ni, Fi, and Fe all resonate with you, don't let a test or theory hold you back from being attuned to them.



Now, this is true. But I think what [MENTION=15291]Mane[/MENTION] was calling out as ridiculous was not being able to be strong in both, which is different than preferring both.

It seems that Ne and Ni would work against each other, for sure. But that doesn't mean that a so-called Ne dominant is an incapable baby when it comes to honing in on a likely possibility or that he is necessarily unskilled in doing so.

no, i actually do mean prefering both... the tests are built around preferance of use, not strength (i remember making a thread questioning that somewhere)...

but i am saying that the view that Ni and Ne conflict behavioraly only stem from the extremes of people who have one or the other, which can certainly be the case for some.

imagine if you had a game where you had to run around in a farm and make a list of the livestock in the order of each animal's population. some people would get a rough estimate for each and then run to the next one (extreme E), some would give each a lot of attention and count it but then miss the rest of the livestocks (extreme I), while others would do something in the middle.

same with intuition - some would get a vague notion of the pattern and run witth the possibilities but miss the underlining meaning and princples (extreme Ne), others would grasp a very deep meaning and underlining patterns within patterns but won't recognize that they have missed other possibilities (extreme Ni), and some would be somewhere in the middle.
 

Mia.

New member
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
821
God, yes; thank you. I have always identified with descriptions for both Ne and Ni. Whether or not I am actually reaally attuned to Ni in the way that Ni users are said to be is a different matter, but I would just go back to my principle of 'walks like a duck.' It's true that Ne and Ni are conceptually different; one is divergent and the other is convergent, so on and so forth. But the truth is that many of us identify with both, and we may as well reconcile reality with our theory. (On the other hand, it should be noted that some Ne-dominants do not identify with Ni at all.)

I can say that I 'synthesize' Ni through Ne and Ti, or.. whatever, but why not just call it Ni? In general, why not call it being oriented to intuition? Why not call it something along the lines of openness? Socionics realizes that 'Ne users' can 'be attuned to Ni,' so why can't we as adherents of MBTI embrace that concept as well?

Ni may not be an Ne user's default, primary way of navigating the world, but to claim that the so-called shadow functions are completely out of reach is ridiculous. To claim that they're out of conscious reach is less ridiculous, but still kinda ridiculous.

This also indicates that the types ought to be defined by their default, primary ways of navigating the world, that they ought to strive for reaching beyond these primary ways, but that they should not be limited to these primary ways. For example, hardcore Ne-dominants may neglect thinking and feeling, and may very well repress sensing. (This means that, say, they may start enterprises without reaping their benefits or seeing them through.) Jung himself says as such. To me, they ought to recognize this and work on it.

Same applies for all of the functions and types, of course.

Very well said. When I took the cognitive functions test I found the same thing, with excellent (100%) usage of Ne, and good (67%, I think) usage of Ni. Even though I recognize I have a very clear orientation and preference for Ne, I find myself able to coalesce the two intuitions together on a regular basis, and these are often my most strongly held notions.

(On the other hand, it should be noted that some Ne-dominants do not identify with Ni at all.)

This was interesting as well, since as an Fi dom I don't identify with Fe at all. Perhaps I can switch back and forth more easily between the two types of N because it holds the aux position.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
same with intuition - some would get a vague notion of the pattern and run witth the possibilities but miss the underlining meaning and princples (extreme Ne), others would grasp a very deep meaning and underlining patterns within patterns but won't recognize that they have missed other possibilities (extreme Ni), and some would be somewhere in the middle.

When you say principles, it could be Ti. That would be the natural "mental doorstop" for Ne/Se. Not Ni or Si.
 

Santosha

New member
Joined
Feb 1, 2011
Messages
1,516
MBTI Type
HUMR
Enneagram
6
Instinctual Variant
sx
So yeah, I don't think we use the shadow functions very much at all if we're operating in a healthy state.

If we do use them, I think the lower down the stack you go, the more difficult it is to access them or it's increasingly disfunctional to use them.

This is interesting to consider. My interpretation of the shadow is the opposite.. that by denying the shadow one remains more closely attached to ego and farther removed from their whole.

"New Paths in Psychology" (1912). In CW 7: Two Essays on Analytical Psychology. P.425

If you imagine someone who is brave enough to withdraw all his projections, then you get an individual who is conscious of a pretty thick shadow. Such a man has saddled himself with new problems and conflicts. He has become a serious problem to himself, as he is now unable to say that they do this or that, they are wrong, and they must be fought against. He lives in the "House of the Gathering." Such a man knows that whatever is wrong in the world is in himself, and if he only learns to deal with his own shadow he has done something real for the world. He has succeeded in shouldering at least an infinitesimal part of the gigantic, unsolved social problems of our day.

"Jung saw shadow as the face of the unconscious as a whole, mainly because the shadow is the first aspect of the unconscious we ever experience. It can have a child-like aspect to it, mainly because the unconscious characteristics, having never or seldom seen the conscious light of day, have never had the opportunity to be civilised and integrated into personality. But the shadow also contains the potential for strengthening and developing us. We must remember that it contains not only our denied weaknesses, but also our hidden strengths. While these may at first appear dark and forbidding, they may provide us with new ways of living, with a flexibility and resilience that our former virtuous but rigid life patterns failed to provide."
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
This is interesting to consider. My interpretation of the shadow is the opposite.. that by denying the shadow one remains more closely attached to ego and farther removed from their whole.

"New Paths in Psychology" (1912). In CW 7: Two Essays on Analytical Psychology. P.425

If you imagine someone who is brave enough to withdraw all his projections, then you get an individual who is conscious of a pretty thick shadow. Such a man has saddled himself with new problems and conflicts. He has become a serious problem to himself, as he is now unable to say that they do this or that, they are wrong, and they must be fought against. He lives in the "House of the Gathering." Such a man knows that whatever is wrong in the world is in himself, and if he only learns to deal with his own shadow he has done something real for the world. He has succeeded in shouldering at least an infinitesimal part of the gigantic, unsolved social problems of our day.

"Jung saw shadow as the face of the unconscious as a whole, mainly because the shadow is the first aspect of the unconscious we ever experience. It can have a child-like aspect to it, mainly because the unconscious characteristics, having never or seldom seen the conscious light of day, have never had the opportunity to be civilised and integrated into personality. But the shadow also contains the potential for strengthening and developing us. We must remember that it contains not only our denied weaknesses, but also our hidden strengths. While these may at first appear dark and forbidding, they may provide us with new ways of living, with a flexibility and resilience that our former virtuous but rigid life patterns failed to provide."

He meams a different shadow i think. Opposite order of your top 4. And or stuff we push down in the bacg we drag behind us
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
He meams a different shadow i think. Opposite order of your top 4. And or stuff we push down in the bacg we drag behind us

Yea he does, but its not simply in opposite order, but the undifferentiated functions. Undifferentiated tert for example would be in shadow(and even aux to some degree in young/psychologically undeveloped people), but once differentiated it comes part of the ego.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Yea he does, but its not simply in opposite order, but the undifferentiated functions. Undifferentiated tert for example would be in shadow(and even aux to some degree in young/psychologically undeveloped people), but once differentiated it comes part of the ego.

That makes sense because he didnt have the concept of a four letter type.
 
S

Society

Guest
When you say principles, it could be Ti. That would be the natural "mental doorstop" for Ne/Se. Not Ni or Si.

both are "minimizing" in a way, but the way i understand it, Ni works by recognizing patterns within patterns, wherein Ti is deduction and conclusion.
 

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
This is interesting to consider. My interpretation of the shadow is the opposite.. that by denying the shadow one remains more closely attached to ego and farther removed from their whole.

"New Paths in Psychology" (1912). In CW 7: Two Essays on Analytical Psychology. P.425

If you imagine someone who is brave enough to withdraw all his projections, then you get an individual who is conscious of a pretty thick shadow. Such a man has saddled himself with new problems and conflicts. He has become a serious problem to himself, as he is now unable to say that they do this or that, they are wrong, and they must be fought against. He lives in the "House of the Gathering." Such a man knows that whatever is wrong in the world is in himself, and if he only learns to deal with his own shadow he has done something real for the world. He has succeeded in shouldering at least an infinitesimal part of the gigantic, unsolved social problems of our day.

"Jung saw shadow as the face of the unconscious as a whole, mainly because the shadow is the first aspect of the unconscious we ever experience. It can have a child-like aspect to it, mainly because the unconscious characteristics, having never or seldom seen the conscious light of day, have never had the opportunity to be civilised and integrated into personality. But the shadow also contains the potential for strengthening and developing us. We must remember that it contains not only our denied weaknesses, but also our hidden strengths. While these may at first appear dark and forbidding, they may provide us with new ways of living, with a flexibility and resilience that our former virtuous but rigid life patterns failed to provide."

OK so now that I'm not in transit - I have a bit more time for a response. This theme of the shadow seems to come up over and over in different contexts in psychology. There are these pieces of ourselves that we disown or distort our thinking. We project faults we don't admit onto others. We project our good qualities we don't realize onto others. Our ego is this false center - a reflection of what others think vs. who we really are in the interdependent whole of human existence. Our distortions, blind spots etc. leads to many people's downfall. I once took a management class and the instructor said if you look at your opposite type - e.g. INFP is ESTJ - that should strike a nerve. It's close to your shadow. You react by saying - "who is that? yuk." Enneagram is similar in that there are these fixations which are not conscious. Our thinking is distorted. We've lost touch with a core part of ourselves. So, it comes up enough that I'm pretty sure the shadow or something like it is important. I don't think it's the same thing as our lower four functions. They are called shadow functions of course. I just think in the relative scheme of things that those four functions are not the important part.

This thread had some good stuff in it.

http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...matrices/32373-shadow-seeds-our-downfall.html

I guess my comments in this thread might contradict some of what I said in that thread but I believe I've changed my mind.
 

Snow Turtle

New member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
1,335
That makes sense because he didnt have the concept of a four letter type.

My biggest problem with that idea of the shadow is that we'll have a large amount of INFJs/ISFJs who never individualizes their Ti (despite being over 30), or has somehow inaccurately assessed themselves in term of preference for Te over Ti.

Then there's the individuals who have developed Ti over Fe. Too many inconsistencies. That's just for the IFJs.
 
G

garbage

Guest
no, i actually do mean prefering both... the tests are built around preferance of use, not strength (i remember making a thread questioning that somewhere)...

but i am saying that the view that Ni and Ne conflict behavioraly only stem from the extremes of people who have one or the other, which can certainly be the case for some.
This is a good point of view. I can certainly imagine a continuum between 'preferring to hone in on what your intuition tells you are the most viable options (or what your intuition tells you is the answer)' and 'preferring to gather up a bunch of appropriate context or possibilities.'

At least, we ought to allow for some continuous variability in someting in our cognitive orientations, because it seems that we won't fully explain orientations otherwise. The discrepancies in this thread and in the cognitive-functions-as-skills tests hint at this.

Very well said. When I took the cognitive functions test I found the same thing, with excellent (100%) usage of Ne, and good (67%, I think) usage of Ni. Even though I recognize I have a very clear orientation and preference for Ne, I find myself able to coalesce the two intuitions together on a regular basis, and these are often my most strongly held notions.
Hell, Ne and Ni are pretty much neck-and-neck for me. My weakness, according to tests, introspection, and experience, is both sensing functions.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
My biggest problem with that idea of the shadow is that we'll have a large amount of INFJs/ISFJs who never individualizes their Ti (despite being over 30), or has somehow inaccurately assessed themselves in term of preference for Te over Ti.

Then there's the individuals who have developed Ti over Fe. Too many inconsistencies. That's just for the IFJs.

Wanna explain why what :huh: i dont get what these two things have to do with each other or why there is some contradiction or something
 
Top