• 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.

Which Function Is Closest To The Unconscious And Why?

highlander

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
26,562
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
It's been said that Ni is the function closest to the subconscious. It seems right to me. But why though?

Why not Fi or any other introverted function? Why not any inferior function for a particular person?
 

Eric B

ⒺⓉⒷ
Joined
Mar 29, 2008
Messages
3,621
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
548
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
This is part of what I was trying to go into here, recently: http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...rices/62213-three-common-ambiguous-terms.html

"unconscious" refers to "inferior function or lower" (which are less conscious than the ego's preferred functions), "introversion" (based on a premise that the external world is what's more "conscious"), and "iNtuition" (based on the idea that sensation is more "conscious"). The latter two (which together answer your question) are more ambiguous, in that Sensation is basically associated with the external world.

But of course, there's introverted Senation, extraverted iNtuition, dominant iNtuition/inferior Sensation, and dominant introversion/inferior extraversion.

Like "objective/subjective", which I used to discuss years ago, they probably lead to degrees of consciousness when combined like that.
 

Siúil a Rúin

when the colors fade
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
14,037
MBTI Type
ISFP
Enneagram
496
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
It is difficult to say between Ni and Ne. Having hung out with some extreme Ne artists, I learned that their creative process was like an open window into their unconscious. They work like awake while dreaming with absolutely uninhibited, free associations of ideas. It is harder to gauge from others the process of Ni because it is internal. My creative process does also feel like I'm dreaming, but the awake part is less striking - it's more like being in a personal, meditative state that freely unleashes ideas without judgment or questioning, but it tends to come out more structured than what I have seen with Ne.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
Funny, I thought it was always Fi that was considered the most unconscious. One things for sure Ni and Fi are the two hardest functions to describe, and to me that reflects the level of unconsciousness in their usage.

I imagine Jung would say that all introverted functions relate to the Unconscious because they distance themselves from the Object. I suppose it's just that some functions distance themselves more than others. Sensing and Thinking functions are more connected with the Object because they are bound by the constraints of 'reality' and 'logic', respectively.

I vaguely remember seeing a chart that was meant to demonstrate the levels of consciousness (or the levels of dependency on external information - something like that) in the use of the functions. It went something like this (I may have a couple around the wrong way, but you get the idea):

Se>Si>Te>Ti>Fe>Ne>Ni>Fi

I may just be going crazy, so I'm hoping someone else saw it.

It is difficult to say between Ni and Ne. Having hung out with some extreme Ne artists, I learned that their creative process was like an open window into their unconscious. They work like awake while dreaming with absolutely uninhibited, free associations of ideas. It is harder to gauge from others the process of Ni because it is internal. My creative process does also feel like I'm dreaming, but the awake part is less striking - it's more like being in a personal, meditative state that freely unleashes ideas without judgment or questioning, but it tends to come out more structured than what I have seen with Ne.
I remember reading an interview with a Ni dom/aux musician and he said that for him writing lyrics or music was like trying to remember something he doesn't know yet. I thought that was a fascinating and revealing comment about Ni and I like that it makes that connection to Si - it shows how Pi is about accessing something underlying.

I do think agree are different sorts of access to the Unconscious and perhaps even different forms of it. Ne free association has a sort of organised chaos about it that people tend to relate to the Unconscious, but is that just how we imagine it works or does it function more like a steady, unfolding truth like Ni? :thinking:
 

Amargith

Hotel California
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Messages
14,717
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
4dw
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
My first reaction was 'Ni' when I saw the thread title. But after reading Fias post and pondering it a bit...I realized that to me, it is 'Ne'.

My reason for it being...most internal functions have a specific feel to them, that is oriented towards something. Ni forms a vision of the future that it can then act upon or not. Fi analyzes and distills raw data to fit them into a logical system, as does Ti. Si catalogues and categories its findings in its archives for future reference. All of them *feel* rather concrete in their purpose to me.

Whereas Ne...Ne acts like a beach ball in the wind. It takes what comes its way - in the abstract field - and spins off on that. We access our subconscious often through association, brainstorming etc, which is Ne's expertise. And granted, dreams and symbols are also part of the language of the subconscious so Ni is definitely a part of it, but the free form that Ne has compared to the tight nit succinctness of Ni makes it somehow seem more in touch with it, i feel. The creativity locked within the subconscious gets free reign without judgement. It's the first moment of creating something new, when things are still in flow. I feel that Ni comes in later, after the brainstorming process to play editor and translate the lot into reality.
 
S

Society

Guest
i actually think extroverted functions are to some degree less conscious - they are being processed faster than the rate at which we experience them, so it's a bit like watching a movie on fast forward, and our consciousness is losing a lot of elements due to that.
i believe much of the extroverted behavior actually stems from the resulting need to catch up to your own thoughts - it leaves you with incomplete strands of thoughts, so we need to bounce them off of others to complete them, much like DNA strands using reproduction to correct for mutations.

the reason sensory functions (and Se in particular) appear more conscious isn't that they are processed more consciously, but because it is easier for the brain to validate them by the external surrounding and bring them up to the surface as a result.

FYI -
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
i actually think extroverted functions are to some degree less conscious - they are being processed faster than the rate at which we experience them, so it's a bit like watching a movie on fast forward, and our consciousness is losing a lot of elements due to that.
i believe much of the extroverted behavior actually stems from the resulting need to catch up to your own thoughts - it leaves you with incomplete strands of thoughts, so we need to bounce them off of others to complete them, much like DNA strands using reproduction to correct for mutations.

the reason sensory functions (and Se in particular) appear more conscious isn't that they are processed more consciously, but because it is easier for the brain to validate them by the external surrounding and bring them up to the surface as a result.

FYI -

I was wondering the same thing too. I believe they are using the shorthand for "unconscious mind" which if I am not mistaken is synomyous with subconscious and not the standard definition of unconscious.

I believe that whether a function is subconscious or not depends on its position in your stack. Any inferior function would fit this description as they serve as the unseen hand which guides you and as they are unseen they are difficult to consciously perceive and thus control. I perceive functions like skyscrapers; your dominant ones have become so tall that their higher levels are above the clouds - they can be seen and easily understood but they have their roots down below. Your inferior ones still influence the skyline but a person flying above a thick cloud cover would have trouble making them out.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
intuition is perception via the unconscious, so intuition for sure. extraverted intuition is sort of the unconscious reaction to whats going on outside, but introverted intuition starts from the inside.

-> Ni is the closest to the unconscious
 

Ene

Active member
Joined
Aug 16, 2012
Messages
3,574
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
5w4
intuition is perception via the unconscious, so intuition for sure. extraverted intuition is sort of the unconscious reaction to whats going on outside, but introverted intuition starts from the inside.

-> Ni is the closest to the unconscious

Agreed.
 

pinkgraffiti

New member
Joined
Mar 20, 2011
Messages
1,482
MBTI Type
ENFP
Enneagram
748
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Funny, I thought it was always Fi that was considered the most unconscious. One things for sure Ni and Fi are the two hardest functions to describe, and to me that reflects the level of unconsciousness in their usage.


i don't understand why Fi is always considered this unattainable guru. i'm going to maintain my respectable distance here, since you are the Fi-dom not me, but i've always been in touch with my Fi and i thought everyone else had it to. isn't the world based on a system of morals etc? i don't personally understand what's so elusive about Fi.
that said, i still can't understand what Ni is about, although i've read so many descriptions of it. maybe it's because i can't understand something i lack. anyway, i'd pick that as the most voodoo-y function (if that is how we are defining "unconscious" here)
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Both Si and Ni partake of the unconscious, Si perhaps more-so, but how does one measure this? Si dips into the wellspring of collective mankind's unconscious symbolism and archetypes. This is contrasted with the "personal unconscious" which is based in experience and is often mistakenly considered to be Si's main characteristic.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
"Subjective perception...however, does not coincide with the contents of consciousness. It is concerned with presuppositions, or dispositions of the collective unconscious, with mythological images, with primal possibilities of ideas."

Psychological Types, p 499. ["Subjective perception" is one of Jung's ways of phrasing "Introverted Sensation."]
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
"Introverted intuition apprehends [takes up into consciousness - Mal] the images which arise from the a priori, i.e. the inherited foundations of the unconscious mind. These archetypes, whose innermost nature is inaccessible to experience, represent the precipitate of psychic functioning of the whole ancestral line, i.e. the heaped-up, or pooled, experiences of organic existence in general, a million times repeated, and condensed into types. Hence, in these archetypes all experiences are represented which since primeval time have happened on this planet. Their archetypal distinctness is the more marked, the more frequently and intensely they have been experienced. The archetype would be to borrow from Kant the noumenon of the image which intuition perceives and, in perceiving, creates."

Psychological Types, pp 507-8

Comparing the two quotes, which function is more in touch with (closest to) the unconscious?
 

Standuble

New member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
1,149
i don't understand why Fi is always considered this unattainable guru. i'm going to maintain my respectable distance here, since you are the Fi-dom not me, but i've always been in touch with my Fi and i thought everyone else had it to. isn't the world based on a system of morals etc? i don't personally understand what's so elusive about Fi.
that said, i still can't understand what Ni is about, although i've read so many descriptions of it. maybe it's because i can't understand something i lack. anyway, i'd pick that as the most voodoo-y function (if that is how we are defining "unconscious" here)

Fi is a system which determines what it is you value in life, it isn't a "moral system" per se. So when you're flying around by the seat of your pants due to Ne Fi would be the voice which speaks to you and asks: "How many of these possibilities do you truly want to follow, how many of them do you truly value? How much of the benefits of following them will be benefits which you truly desire from life? Do they allow you to be the person you are?" and similar such questions. After cutting away any neuroticism, any emotion and all the other crap which constitutes the conscious mind the Fi is merely a sage/mentor like voice not only having you ask these sorts of questions but also provides the answers.

This is perhaps why Fi is perceived to be subconscious. What it tells you is seemingly removed from what is going on in your life. All that touches your day to day life, Fi will often just declare it all BS as if Fi were completely unaffected or uninfluenced by it - and that it was from a part of you deep down beyond the reach of the material world's reach. Fi for the most part is reshaped usually very gradually at best (or if at all) inside a person. A lifetime of experiencing it causes one to wonder whether it is the voice of the "true self" or what makes you "you" (beyond what you consciously perceive about yourself) and dare I say what one could consider the "soul" and Fi's apparent resistance to influence causes it to become implicitly trusted without question about what you really think and feel about said matter (even if you did choose to doubt it you don't really have much choice in the matter but to follow as Fi raises objection as if it were a dictator when you deviate from its commands.)

The big question for Fi users is whether their Fi reflects the desires of the self. If you're like me then you find yourself believing all it tells you without questioning whether it is what you truly want. After all, how can you measure it? But that's a different topic.
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
I believe both Fi & Ni are described as "closest" to the collective unconscious. Both have a focus on the "images" from it. But I think Ni is described as closest to the subconscious, and Ne has a strong connection to it as well.

A big distinction Jung makes in how these types experience the "images" from the unconscious is that one is rational & the other not (perceiving, for those of you offended by irrational). Ji types, being rational, relate their inner images to themselves - in other words, the self is a guage for making sense, for ordering experience, and being introverted, that's the inner experience. This is why Ti types must repress Fe - they seek to make themselves a gauge for what is impersonally logical, and that means ordering their inner self in a way that cuts out personal feeling.

The Pi type, however, does not relate the inner image to the self because the self is not a gauge for ordering experience - they use external measures with Je. This is why there's the stereotype of the Si type enjoying facts & information just for the hell of it. It needs no purpose or meaning, in itself it fascinates them because they like to build an inner sense of reality.

Jung describes the Ni type as pursuing the inner images the way a Se type pursues tangible experience or the fickle way a Ne type pursues possibilities in the outer world. What they pursue is different perspectives mentally, which requires an access to what most people repress consciously. Instead of the firm grasp of sure reality an introverted sensing type seeks, they pursue these images from their subconscious, and maybe you could call these different perspectives or fantasies (IDK, I'm not a Ni type). Jung says meaning is not given unless they develop some judging.

I personally interpret this to mean something like: the Fi type interprets whatever arises from their unconscious in whatever form (be it imagination, emotion, psychological instincts, etc), as something which indicates MEANING for them. They interpret it as a value-concept in symbolic form. Their reaction to these images is what informs them of what value means. An inner experience can be "good" then, and their gauge for value is refined & deepened. The focus is on this value-concept formation then, not on ordering the outer world in terms of value (which is why IFPs can actually seem indecisive at times). This requires a close inspection of all aspects of the self to know what the "human condition" is, so instead of the mind repressing highly personal or idiosyncratic or just not rational things like a Ti type might, the Fi type must have a close access to it.

Jung says the Ni type doesn't connect their inner images to personal meaning. They don't relate it themselves. The sheer pursuit of it internally is what interests them. He says this is hard for a Ji type to imagine (and it is). Of course, this detachment of it from themselves allows different perspectives to be explored because you are not attaching your identity to it the way a Fi type would. The self does not need the kind of consistency a Ji-dom ego requires.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Fi isn't AS close to the unconscious as Si and Ni. It makes it presence known to the Fi type indirectly, through psychological symptoms.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
i actually think extroverted functions are to some degree less conscious - they are being processed faster than the rate at which we experience them, so it's a bit like watching a movie on fast forward, and our consciousness is losing a lot of elements due to that.
i believe much of the extroverted behavior actually stems from the resulting need to catch up to your own thoughts - it leaves you with incomplete strands of thoughts, so we need to bounce them off of others to complete them, much like DNA strands using reproduction to correct for mutations.

the reason sensory functions (and Se in particular) appear more conscious isn't that they are processed more consciously, but because it is easier for the brain to validate them by the external surrounding and bring them up to the surface as a result.
Yes, I was thinking this in part too. Pe in particular often reacts on pure instinct and without conscious thought. Introverted functions are by nature more consciously processed - and you could say that creates a distance to the Unconscious.

What it comes down to is what we're actually describing here. I really think we need a definition. Are we talking about exhibiting the qualities of the Unconscious or being able to intimately connect to the Unconscious through thought? If the latter, is a stronger connection defined by the level of direct 'consciousness' and awareness of the Unconscious, or is it defined by the ability indirectly channel it's outputs? Must it be a Perceiving function or can Judging functions access it too? :shrug:

FYI -
Yes, I was also feeling iffy about this too. The thing is this usage of the term is actually an approximation for us as well, due to translation; what Freud called das Unbewusste (which I understand translates to "the unknown"). The word can be used to mean a lot of things and can be applied in a number of ways in English. Some people use Unconscious and Subconscious interchangeably too. Basically, many of us may be just as confused (I confess I am, somewhat). I suspect the German language might have a better grip on it than English. :D

i don't understand why Fi is always considered this unattainable guru. i'm going to maintain my respectable distance here, since you are the Fi-dom not me, but i've always been in touch with my Fi and i thought everyone else had it to. isn't the world based on a system of morals etc? i don't personally understand what's so elusive about Fi.
that said, i still can't understand what Ni is about, although i've read so many descriptions of it. maybe it's because i can't understand something i lack. anyway, i'd pick that as the most voodoo-y function (if that is how we are defining "unconscious" here)
Well, to us Ni is going to be mysterious, just as Fi will be to FJs and TPs, I guess. It is odd that you perceive it as self-evident truth that it is a rational system (although as [MENTION=14363]Standuble[/MENTION] says, it's more than merely "a moral system") because most people don't. :D You are correct of course.

But there is something very strange about Fi, and I say this as a dominant user. I can just know something's a certain way without having any rational reason to believe it to be so. I can just know, understand and feel things beyond my own experience in the most bizarre way. I know exactly how it would feel to be in love, despite never having been anywhere near feeling it in life - I know it because I can literally create and experience the feeling itself in my head (and body). I can't really justify or explain this in any objective manner, but I feel like I'm connected with the very depths of my mind, to a place that's universal among all human beings. It's like being able to delve deep into the 'muscles' of the mind (that are fundamental to all human beings); to be able to see and understand how each sinew contracts and expands; and even to be able to manipulate them to some degree to create certain feelings/impressions/reactions within myself. I'm sure that probably sounds like BS to everyone else but I assure you it's very real to me.

And I don't know if that makes it closest to the Unconscious or not. :shrug: It being a Judging function might complicate things a bit.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
But there is something very strange about Fi, and I say this as a dominant user. I can just know something's a certain way without having any rational reason to believe it to be so. I can just know, understand and feel things beyond my own experience in the most bizarre way. I know exactly how it would feel to be in love, despite never having been anywhere near feeling it in life - I know it because I can literally create and experience the feeling itself in my head (and body). I can't really justify or explain this in any objective manner, but I feel like I'm connected with the very depths of my mind, to a place that's universal among all human beings. It's like being able to delve deep into the 'muscles' of the mind (that are funadamental to all human beings); to be able to see and understand how each sinew contracts and expands; and even to be able to manipulate them to some degree to create certain feelings/impressions/reactions within myself. I'm sure that probably sounds like BS to everyone else but I assure you it's very real to me.

And I don't know if that makes it closest to the Unconscious or not. :shrug: It being a Judging function might complicate things a bit.

Sigh.... I'm not so much exasperated, I just know in advance that what I'm about to say will be completely rejected. And that is: Jung's Fi type describes the INFJ in the MBTI system.

I know, I know; this goes against all the current memes being tossed hither and thither regarding JCF and MBTI.
 

Southern Kross

Away with the fairies
Joined
Dec 22, 2008
Messages
2,910
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
so/sp
Sigh.... I'm not so much exasperated, I just know in advance that what I'm about to say will be completely rejected. And that is: Jung's Fi type describes the INFJ in the MBTI system.

I know, I know; this goes against all the current memes being tossed hither and thither regarding JCF and MBTI.
What did I say that made you say this?

And what is this theory of yours?
 
S

Society

Guest
Yes, I was thinking this in part too. Pe in particular often reacts on pure instinct and without conscious thought. Introverted functions are by nature more consciously processed - and you could say that creates a distance to the Unconscious.

What it comes down to is what we're actually describing here. I really think we need a definition. Are we talking about exhibiting the qualities of the Unconscious or being able to intimately connect to the Unconscious through thought? If the latter, is a stronger connection defined by the level of direct 'consciousness' and awareness of the Unconscious, or is it defined by the ability indirectly channel it's outputs? Must it be a Perceiving function or can Judging functions access it too? :shrug:

exactly:
are we talking about which processes happen less consciously? probably Pe.
are we talking about which processes are more deeply tied to the state of the subconscious? Pi.
are we talking about which process have a better grasp of the subconscious? probably feeling functions.
 
Top