Function hierarchies

[RaptorWizard]

This idea of "shadow functions" is just some fail theory that contradicts with the definition of what a functions are.

Basic functions are just T, S, F and N and there is objective and subjective aspects in them. When a function is oriented by the subjective aspect, the objective aspect gets repressed to the furthest degree due to mistrust in the objective aspect. This trust in the subjective and repressing the objective means introverted attitude of a function and it should be obvious to people that you cant really trust and enforce an subjective orientation, while also mistrusting and repressing its opposite as they are mutually exclusive. So while Ti dom cant have Te, he can still have Fe as Fe doesent contradict with Ti. You need to see it as one judging function(T or F) being favored by the subjective world and the other is pushed towards its opposite, the objective world. Same goes with perceiving functions. For example if someone prefers to focus on the things that sensations bring in him instead of just purely focusing on the sensation itself, he can still focus on the possibilities in the objective world(have Ne). You see there is just one truth to people and only schizophrenics can hold two contrary truths. For an INTP the "truth" comes from the subjective logic, possibilities that lie in the objective world, what the sensations release in him and values in the objective world. While logic of the objective world is met with mistrust, ideas without any relation to objective world seem just crazy, sensation itself doesent represent the real truths but are just representations of deeper truths and values without any relation to the external world makes no sense.

When jungians talk of the shadow(not those people who use the term shadow function, but those that invented typology and the term shadow), they are talking about things in yourself that you are not conscious of and are opposite to who you think you are. For example a humble person has a greedy shadow, king has a weak shadow etc etc

I've been blinded by too much logic - ugghhh, the PAIN; make it stop, make it STOP!!!

Too much Ti must make my brain hurt...

 

[INTP]

I've been blinded by too much logic - ugghhh, the PAIN; make it stop, make it STOP!!!

Too much Ti must make my brain hurt...

Only cry cuz crappeur :----DDD

 

[Avocado]

I've been blinded by too much logic - ugghhh, the PAIN; make it stop, make it STOP!!!

Too much Ti must make my brain hurt...

Too me, it was just fine…

 

[Society]

(this is probably going further off topic - i get the impression that the OP was about the notion that Jung thought of some functions better then of others, and not about the function hierarchy within each type of the myer-brigs model... but hey while it's rolling...)

This idea of "shadow functions" is just some fail theory that contradicts with the definition of what a functions are.

Basic functions are just T, S, F and N and there is objective and subjective aspects in them. When a function is oriented by the subjective aspect, the objective aspect gets repressed to the furthest degree due to mistrust in the objective aspect. This trust in the subjective and repressing the objective means introverted attitude of a function and it should be obvious to people that you cant really trust and enforce an subjective orientation, while also mistrusting and repressing its opposite as they are mutually exclusive. So while Ti dom cant have Te, he can still have Fe as Fe doesent contradict with Ti. You need to see it as one judging function(T or F) being favored by the subjective world and the other is pushed towards its opposite, the objective world. Same goes with perceiving functions. For example if someone prefers to focus on the things that sensations bring in him instead of just purely focusing on the sensation itself, he can still focus on the possibilities in the objective world(have Ne). You see there is just one truth to people and only schizophrenics can hold two contrary truths. For an INTP the "truth" comes from the subjective logic, possibilities that lie in the objective world, what the sensations release in him and values in the objective world. While logic of the objective world is met with mistrust, ideas without any relation to objective world seem just crazy, sensation itself doesent represent the real truths but are just representations of deeper truths and values without any relation to the external world makes no sense.

that's problematic - it requires a very inconsistent cherry picking of which aspects we account of which function:

just like you can say:
"Ne focuses on the possibilities in the objective world" (A1)
"Ni focuses on internal insight from one's subjective world" (A2)

you could also say:
"Ni focuses on foresight following patterns from the objective world" (B1)
"Ne focuses on conceptions imagined within one's subjective world" (B2)

in A1, you'd be saying that Ne is objective because where it applies it's products too..
in A2, you'd be saying that Ni is subjective because of where it generates the products...

in B1, you'd be saying that Ni is objective because of where it applies too...
in B2, you'd be saying that Ne is subjective because of where it generates the products...

that theory requires that we'd framing each function intently to fit into the general scheme (a.k.a. the literal understanding of objective vs. subjective within the description of function orientation), regardless of the complete nature of the function... it's entirely dependent on completely arbitrary choices of word play.
this in itself doesn't mean that the objective vs. subjective isn't applicable to function orientation on a more metaphorical level, but what it does show is that the theory breaks the moment we assume objectivity vs. subjectivity are designations of which version of reality the function focuses on in mutually exclusive terms - each function has aspects which would break the illusion of being exclusively objective or exclusively subjective when accounted for.

mind you, i am skeptical about the "8 function" / "shadow function" theory myself, but i think the fact people felt the need to invent it (multiply times) and embrace it (a shit ton of times) does demonstrate a problem with MBTI - it was created because people observed & experienced demonstrations of functions which didn't fit into the MBTI 4 function standard model. this is actually shown more empirically in the function test results threads for each type, where so many people score high on what was supposed to be mutually exclusive functions - Te & Ti, Fe & Fi, Ne & Ni, etc... now you can say that the test results are skewed, the test didn't look for the correct aspects, reliance on self-examination is limited and people answered wrongly, etc... there's plenty of reasons to hold the benefit of the doubt before throwing MBTI out with the bathwater, but it does illustrate that what people think of as the functions doesn't seem to be mutually exclusive, and thus why people wanted a way to explain it (and came up with the 8 function model).