[Jungian Cognitive Functions] Jung's "ninth" personality type

[cascadeco]

Apologies-I am uncertain if that stats I quoted are considered IP or not, as I saw them in a you tube video given by a lecturer, so did not want to elaborate more. Let me poke a bit and get back to you....

The suggestion is mentioned in Jung's psychological types and in work by Jacobi as well, where she summarizes his ideas. Upon further study of those texts, it seems to be a description of a person, as [MENTION=1206]cascadeco[/MENTION] mentioned, who developed a bit differently, and learned to use the dominant and inferior functions in concert-thus honestly neglecting the two middle functions somewhat. It seems to be more obvious in perceivesr and not as notable in dominant judgers.

Thus you would see NeSi, SeNi, NiSe, and SiNe as the most used functions (although as we note, the other functions emerge as in a complex symphony that resembles the jungian "complex", constantly shifting and changing-@jaguars musical description is quite apt.).

In these individuals you would expect to see a ping-pong of sorts and as it occurs, abrupt transition in communication styles and thought patterns. The reason this matters is that others will misread this shift and assume inauthenticity or fake behavior, when in reality, the person is simply shifting gears and perceiving the problem differently. People who fall into this bucket can be extremely hard to read by others.

Lol, for me, over the years I have been called a boring enfp, a stupid entp, an overly emotional estj and people say "you arent like any other enfp I have met". It is very helpful for me as an individual to understand Im something else, especially the communication aspects. It also helps me understand what my mid-life crisis looks like, lol. I had a simply wonderful dinner with a jungian expert and he explained that I am "blessed by the dual gifts of sensing and intuition and that my team would love me, even as my peers are afraid of me" because what I see, I accomplish. Id suggest I primarily function in an NeSiTeFi mode but that isnt defining as Ni can appear and the emphasis of any of the buckets can shift some.

We are simply beautiful songs I suspect in constant evolution and adaptation.

PS Jacombi's work on the unconscious is simply brilliant.

Cool, I can't comment on anything tied to Jung / his theories, but I think this overall discussion is interesting.

I honestly think on typology forums it's super easy to get lulled into the notion of abcd's are like this, and if they're not like this then they're something else, and so on, but there are so many people irl -- even notable on this forum re people having issues typing people they know irl or themselves -- where it's simply not that straightforward. Mbti likes to make it SEEM like it's super straightforward though. And as I type this, yes, to people who use it more as it's supposed to be used, as *preferences*, then everything's a.o.k. - maybe. It's just that there's always that tendency by pretty much everyone to want to apply it rigidly. Not to mention the fact that it's not like cognitive functions are exactly REAL at this juncture -- in a way they're just made up; words to describe patterns of thought. Again, human's desire to categorize and find patterns - though as [MENTION=14857]fia[/MENTION] has mentioned more than once, who's to say they're the only patterns or even the most important ones? Two centuries from now everyone might be laughing at mbti. I mean, who knows.

I don't know enough people IRL who know or care about mbti to throw different types at me like you say has happened to you, but, I can say that I'm well aware that I'm not the archetypal ISFP (btw when we used to interact more often yrs ago, I know I didn't type myself as such and so you may not really see me that way - but that's ok, anyway.... ). I mean, the very fact that I get engaged in some of these online discussions re psychology and personality may seem to go against that typing. But I find personality very interesting - and differences in people. But otoh, I can be completely, utterly bored to tears irl with long theoretical discussions. I just find them, well, boring and pointless, if they drag on endlessly, and depending on the subject. I'd rather just be doing an activity or engaging in something vs 'just talking'. I could go on, but all of this is to say, with my own example here, I hear you on being harder to read. Also, btw, I'm not trying to turn this into an 'I'm special' thing, because, well, I think as you point out, a lot of people can be hard to read, or type, so I don't think I'm super unique at all in this respect.

All of this to say, people are complex/interesting, and may not be easy to pin down. And I think in many ways science hasn't even scraped the surface of the brain or beginning to understand a lot of this stuff.

 

[reckful]

Apologies-I am uncertain if that stats I quoted are considered IP or not, as I saw them in a you tube video given by a lecturer, so did not want to elaborate more. Let me poke a bit and get back to you....

Can you post a link to that video?

The suggestion is mentioned in Jung's psychological types and in work by Jacobi as well, where she summarizes his ideas. Upon further study of those texts, it seems to be a description of a person, as [MENTION=1206]cascadeco[/MENTION] mentioned, who developed a bit differently, and learned to use the dominant and inferior functions in concert-thus honestly neglecting the two middle functions somewhat. It seems to be more obvious in perceivesr and not as notable in dominant judgers.

Thus you would see NeSi, SeNi, NiSe, and SiNe as the most used functions (although as we note, the other functions emerge as in a complex symphony that resembles the jungian "complex", constantly shifting and changing-@jaguars musical description is quite apt.).

You say that idea is "mentioned in" Psychological Types. Can you point me to the passage you're talking about?

 

[Jaguar]

We are simply beautiful songs I suspect in constant evolution and adaptation.

That is the entire point. To be a type is an extreme of consciousness. A problem. The goal is not a static, extreme existence, but to rise above the problem of identifying with a type as if one were standing on a bridge looking down at the troubled waters of opposing forces which lie beneath. Can you imagine if you still identified with an extreme position on anything after decades of living? That's like never getting out of first gear when you have a five-speed manual transmission. And as you push harder on the accelerator with your foot, you don't move any quicker, you hear only a god-awful accelerating sound in the engine.

 

[Little_Sticks]

Have you guys heard of this before?

Maybe.
Jung used the subconscious as a baseline influence for the ego. A strong ego creates problems with both the ego and the subconscious because as you build up a particular way of being, the subconscious influences you more by narrowing the mind's ability to understand in a wider scope. The way to overcome this is through neurosis; your ego is challenged and broken down, which leads to the subconscious reacting out to defend itself. Although a typically painful process, if the experience is embraced as a defeat or failure of the mind, it can give someone the ability to question and understand themselves, to learn from their mistakes by broadening the scope of their mind.

That said, somebody that has a strong command of their subconscious is thought to have a handle on their cognitive limits and biases and is able to use their subconscious instincts in an intelligent adaptable manner, rather than just reacting or following biases. On the other hand, someone that never had a strong ego to begin with can oscillate between different ways of being as well, but they have no strong sense of self, no strong influence or direction to what they do; they mostly blow in the wind, where their sense of meaning, and therefore self, is ...weak, if existent.

I just want to make the distinction between the two because the latter is closer to ... being dead. And yet they both have some kind of idea of a cognitive balance.

 

[sculpting]

Can you post a link to that video?



You say that idea is "mentioned in" Psychological Types. Can you point me to the passage you're talking about?

Apologies reckful, I got slightly distracted with work.

I think, that since this content references the source material it should be considered copyrighted at that source thus ok to share as long as the original sources are given credit. It uses underlying Jungian functional theory represented in a different way from MBTI. closer to sanger-loomis.

This was the you tube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mllFeHI7kEk

This is a link to more details around this "creative type" and characteristics one might observe in folks who are undergoing this transition as a phase in life or who are exhibit it throughout life:

The Insights Creative Position - The Colour Works | The Colour Works

A quite from this doc: "The members of the team may view the individual in the Creative position as a chameleon – someone who “is all things to all people”. Labels such as “insincere”, “untrustworthy”, “erratic”, “phoney”, “slippery”, and “confusing” are sometimes applied. “I just can’t figure her/him out” is a phrase that is often used. The Creative individual is often misunderstood and can be marginalised. He or she can end up feeling alienated, rejected – and the vast potential of the gifts that can be given to the group or organisation are not realised."

 

[reckful]

I think, that since this content references the source material it should be considered copyrighted at that source thus ok to share as long as the original sources are given credit. It uses underlying Jungian functional theory represented in a different way from MBTI. closer to sanger-loomis.

This was the you tube video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mllFeHI7kEk

That's a 55-minute video. Can you point us to the approximate timing where he talks about that 2-million-subject study you referred to in your OP, which you said showed that 9% of the population is characterized by "rapid switching from what appear to be diametrically opposed functions (ie Ne and Si or Te and Fi) without the extreme negative consequences often seen by shadow/stress induced use of the tert or inf function"?

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

This reminds me of Arendee's thread about a tenth enneagram type.
[MENTION=195]Jaguar[/MENTION] sometimes I use my left hand for a "different" experience. Double different if I sit on it first.

 

[Eric B]

Since the eight function-attitudes associate with ego states (the dominant being simply the ego's main "hero" or primary achieving state), then what's described here sounds simply like ego states (complexes) that have been too dissociated, as to create sub-personalities.
We all use dissociation to separate the different ego states, but when dissociation is too great, then it gets considered a "disorder", and you may have what amount (in differeng degrees) to "multiple personalities". The different personalities may have their own "types", meaning their own dominant functional perspective, at least. From what I've seen, this does seem to be the case. The APS system I talk about, even has among their counselor manuals, a book of case studies, which includes one person who was given an APS form for each personality, and they came out as different temperament combinations. (They eventually continued therapy, and determined the true temperament).

(As I was discussing in another thread, I used to think the "Pure Phlegmatic" would be totally "ambidextrous" in all the functions ⦅since it's really moderate in all scales⦆, but we tried developing an idea like that here years ago, and it doesn't work, there's always a preference for one or the other, even if very slight).

Otherwise, I don't think there are any people walking around who prefer the "transcendant function". The functions are how we divide reality, and the transcendant is what unites the opposites (called the "coniunctio"). It's supposed to be what "individuation" is about, but I don't think that's anything where we can actually "get there". Such a person would be seeing "undivided reality", and who really can be like that? It would be superhuman, like someone who can see back and forth at the same time.
I think it's more hypothetical, like a calculus equation describing "∞" as the "limit" of an asymptote. So we can become more aware of the opposite perspectve, but will always still prefer the dominant. That's part of who we are as a person. Someone who appears to "prefer" both (or all" or whatever) equally, or switch from one to others, is probably someone with some sort of disorder.

(Should add, on the tap3x site, one page tries to add a ninth function to match MBTI to Enneagram by adding what they call "extraverted Moving", which is taken from Horney's scales. Seems made up out of thin air to me).

 

[JocktheMotie]

FINALLY a new supertype to be, instead of just being a Ni dom.

 

[Eric B]

You always wore INTP. So you're considering INTJ now, or maybe straddling both?

 

[JocktheMotie]

No, I'm INTP. But I was mostly commenting on how I think this particular "type" would be "used" by a considerable subset of people as a way to make themselves feel important.

 

[erm]

No, I'm INTP. But I was mostly commenting on how I think this particular "type" would be "used" by a considerable subset of people as a way to make themselves feel important.

*notes avatar*

The NT types were created to identify those people.

 

[sculpting]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION] Id appreciate your thoughts on the other link in my post from a recognized, established product on the market that utilizes this framework:

"The Insights Creative Position - The Colour Works | The Colour Works: The Insights Creative Position - The Colour Works | The Colour Works

A quite from this doc: "The members of the team may view the individual in the Creative position as a chameleon – someone who “is all things to all people”. Labels such as “insincere”, “untrustworthy”, “erratic”, “phoney”, “slippery”, and “confusing” are sometimes applied. “I just can’t figure her/him out” is a phrase that is often used. The Creative individual is often misunderstood and can be marginalised. He or she can end up feeling alienated, rejected – and the vast potential of the gifts that can be given to the group or organisation are not realised."

Since the eight function-attitudes associate with ego states (the dominant being simply the ego's main "hero" or primary achieving state), then what's described here sounds simply like ego states (complexes) that have been too dissociated, as to create sub-personalities.
We all use dissociation to separate the different ego states, but when dissociation is too great, then it gets considered a "disorder", and you may have what amount (in differeng degrees) to "multiple personalities". The different personalities may have their own "types", meaning their own dominant functional perspective, at least. From what I've seen, this does seem to be the case. The APS system I talk about, even has among their counselor manuals, a book of case studies, which includes one person who was given an APS form for each personality, and they came out as different temperament combinations. (They eventually continued therapy, and determined the true temperament).

(As I was discussing in another thread, I used to think the "Pure Phlegmatic" would be totally "ambidextrous" in all the functions ⦅since it's really moderate in all scales⦆, but we tried developing an idea like that here years ago, and it doesn't work, there's always a preference for one or the other, even if very slight).

Otherwise, I don't think there are any people walking around who prefer the "transcendant function". The functions are how we divide reality, and the transcendant is what unites the opposites (called the "coniunctio"). It's supposed to be what "individuation" is about, but I don't think that's anything where we can actually "get there". Such a person would be seeing "undivided reality", and who really can be like that? It would be superhuman, like someone who can see back and forth at the same time.
I think it's more hypothetical, like a calculus equation describing "∞" as the "limit" of an asymptote. So we can become more aware of the opposite perspectve, but will always still prefer the dominant. That's part of who we are as a person. Someone who appears to "prefer" both (or all" or whatever) equally, or switch from one to others, is probably someone with some sort of disorder.

(Should add, on the tap3x site, one page tries to add a ninth function to match MBTI to Enneagram by adding what they call "extraverted Moving", which is taken from Horney's scales. Seems made up out of thin air to me).

I think you make a many thoughtful points.

Wrt your last comment, it was noted to me by the Jungian expert who introduced me to this topic that these creative types do fall into enneagram 4. Not sure I totally buy that, but that was his perspective.

You note that you would have two sub-personalities. I think most people already experience this with the first two functions being their dominant personality, and the second two being "sub-conscious, shadow, inferior" etc, depending on who is labeling them. You use you second half, but not so so skillfully. Thus as an INTP, one would be (TiNe) (SiFe). In some sense we all utilize multiple complexes, and even those weave and shift depending upon the momentary need.

When dealing with people who fit into this model, it is exactly as you describe "someone who can see back and forth at the same time" My perception is of alternating a lens rapidly back and forth between the big picture and the granular details based upon understood history. (NeSi) with (FiTe) being ignored as I do this. Id suggest, neglect of the judging functions may occur as a result since they are "the second half". I have met three INTJ people who function this way. They describe it as being more continuous, like fluid movement and all have heavy inclinations towards the arts, spirituality and a much stronger sense of Se that a typical INTJ. In turn, they seem to lack the clear refined Te one expects from INTJs of their age.

These folks are "odd", but because they see the world from this hyper-perceiving way (given sacrificed strength in other places), they do gain a unique insights at times.

From what I have read, this pattern arises due to a few reasons 1) external stress during childhood, 2) its often seen in adults raised in rapidly changing environments, like military raised kids or 3) a temporary transition state during growth periods-like going off to college or a mid-life crisis.

(just to be clear, I didnt make this stuff up on my own I stumbled across it and it just fits pretty well and makes sense)

 

[sculpting]

‘The stronger the individual’s natural relation to the unconscious, the more difficult this task [of
identifying a clear attitude type] becomes. This applies most of all to artistic natures. Creative men and
artists posses an extra ordinary natural relation, ‘a direct line’ to the unconscious, and are hard to assign
to a type, all the more so because an artist cannot automatically be equated with his work. Often one
and the same artist is an extravert in his life and an introvert in his work, or the other way round’.
(Jacobi, 1958)

Jung was fascinated by the significance of unconscious elements. He concluded that within the group of
persons who are not a clear type, there exist a number of persons for whom type stability is represented
by conscious use of a normally unconscious inferior function. This combination is a normal expression of
their personality.

 

[Jaguar]

"The Insights Creative Position - The Colour Works | The Colour Works: The Insights Creative Position - The Colour Works | The Colour Works

You'll find a similarity between that and the inconsistent Holland personality pattern:

https://www.careerkey.org/choose-a-career/unusual-Holland-Code-combinations.html#.VrZXiLkrJFS
Career Key Blog: Holland Personality Type Patterns That Are Inconsistent - and Their Advantages


I'm an EI Holland type (Enterprising-Investigative) - they oppose on the hexagon. The way I view things is not "this or that," it's more about synthesis.

 

[Ghost of the dead horse]

Nice test, although I was disappointed on the lack of technical science options. I scored as a CEA.

On the thread topic, I've seen myself as flexible, able to move between different viewpoints, able to move between different mindsets. Taking the side of an argument I don't really belive in. Altering my subjective experience to better fit some situation. What should I believe in if I want to succeed in endeavor X? Oh I should believe in Z, W and U? Ok, I'll do that.

I sometimes feel like using the "method acting" style in approaching some ideas and topics. I often find it funny for people to fit so nicely in their own compartment, as they could just as easily be in another compartment, or in many of them at the same time, or move flexibly between different styles and mindsets. I've had to learn to portray a stable image, and I can totally do that, at least until I feel particularly playful.

Stable behavior is kind of the standard expectation for people and that's what people are accustomed to. Other kind of behavior seems wrong to them. Instead of standardizing themselves, people should be flexible and do what's required or whatever brings advantage to them or the others.

This "standardized personality" is most likely an adaptation to the poor ability of people to handle the real complexity of human behavior. Like in language teaching, when one person consistently speaks one language and another person speaks another language, people learn the language the best. In similar way, people understand behavior when the behavior does not change. Flexible people must adapt to the expectations. It's a joke really.

There's a downside to this "flexibility". I feel ungenuine, rootless. Someone has said "be yourself" or find "the real you". I've asked in return who's me and what's real. Of course, there's something, but lot of behaviors seem completely voluntary to me, one can turn them on and off on a moment's notice. It seems silly to me that such easily alterable behaviors would form the "genuine self" for someone, but that seems to be the truth nevertheless. As in, someone's always happy and then they're known as the happy fellow.

 

[Paladin-X]

You say that idea is "mentioned in" Psychological Types. Can you point me to the passage you're talking about?

In PT - read Symbol definition in Chapter XI (or transcendent function definition, which just points you to the symbol one)

Assuming you own the paper copy, look at Par 184, 205, 427, 759, & 828.

 

[reckful]

In PT - read Symbol definition in Chapter XI (or transcendent function definition, which just points you to the symbol one)

Assuming you own the paper copy, look at Par 184, 205, 427, 759, & 828.

I'm familiar with Jung's "transcendent function" concept, but I'd say it bears little resemblance to that "ninth personality type" described in the OP.

What Jung referred to as the "transcendent function" was very much a temporary phenomenon that only happened every once in a while, generally after a gradual build-up of unconscious libido resulting from an overly one-sided dominant function. You might think of it as an epiphany of sorts, but Jung stressed that the temporary uniting of extraversion and introversion that resulted wasn't something that the person could really consciously comprehend — so whatever "lesson" might be learned wouldn't be something the person would be able to explain or teach to anyone else.

And the transcendent unity would be fleeting as well. Jung said that the "opposites" inevitably "recover their strength" — and a good thing, too, since the person's will was "suspended" during the transcendent function episode.

More than enough detail, probably... but the point is, the transcendent "function" that Jung described was a very different kind of thing than the perceiving and judging "functions" that he thought were used on a daily basis, and having a "transcendent function" episode didn't involve the replacement of one of those, or lead to a different kind of use of the person's other functions while their "will" wasn't suspended.

By contrast, the OP describes some kind of elite category of person — a ninth "personality type" (not a ninth function) — who makes "stable, productive and healthy use of tertiary and inferior functions as a natural part of the individuals psyche with near the strength and competence of a dominent or aux user of that function."

 

[Thalassa]

I actually assumed that since Jung diagnosed neurosis in people "everyone is neurotic" that personality type is not what one would call an "enlightened" person. Truly enlightened people are rare, and are either sainted, or live obscure lives of complete humility without fame, changing the world without ego, with their way of being. It takes a great deal of self awareness and maturity to be enlightened, and many people who think they are "enlightened" are usually half way there but their ego gets in the way of their spiritual growth, so they become gurus or cult leaders...it's one of the reasons I hate Big Five. Big Five essentially holds a stable ENFJ up as an ideal social norm, unsurprising in Western society among a bunch of people who chose to be shrinks. In Jungian theory we're all neurotic and gifted in different ways, then there's the "enlightened."

That would be my take on this. I've also heard rumors Keirsey theory can only be applied to shattered Western people who over-identify with ego.