Eric B
ⒺⓉⒷ
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,621
- MBTI Type
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 548
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
When discussing the archeypes; I've been pointing out that these are really what are called "ego states", which are lesser senses of "I" under the ego, which are what carry the other functions below the dominant. This concept is from an Austrian psychologist Paul Federn, who articulated a “Two Energy Theory†that basically corresponds to the attitudes. This can be read about in the book Ego States: Theory and Therapy, John G. and Helen H. Watkins, W. W. Norton & Company, New York, 1997 (see http://www.typologycentral.com/foru...go-backbone-type-post2922403.html#post2922403). The technical term he gave for the "flow" of energy or "libido" that in Jung's theory defines the attitudes is "cathexis", from the ancient Greek κάθεξις (kathexis, "holding, retention"). It was chosen by James Strachey to render the German term Besetzung in his translation of Sigmund Freud's complete works. Federn then decided that Freud's "single energy " (i.e. "libido", which was assumed to be directed outward only) concept "could not explain all the ramifications and decided that ego-libido was not merely the same energy with a redirected objective, but an entirely different kind of energy from ordinary libido, qualitatively speaking. He gradually dropped the term 'libido' and more frequently referred to two different types of energies: object cathexis and ego cathexis." (Ego States, p.14).
Things can be either "ego cathected", where we experience them as part of ourselves, (and project them outward onto other people or objects, which are then filtered through the subjective view), or "object cathected" where we see them as "not me", but nevertheless take them in (introject), where they become "internal objects", that (according to Jung), the subject merges himself with.
Object cathected data is said to be taken as “perceptionsâ€, while ego cathected data is recognized as your own “thoughts".
(So with introverted function, the ego cathects S, N, T or F data; and I'm wondering if we always recognize the perspective as our own thought? Sometimes it seems as if we don't; so I'm wondering if that might be part of what's “unconscious†about introverted functions. Perhaps, what's conscious is the object cathexis of the associated extraverted function [other preferred function, or tandem mate, or either/both?] where the ego object cathects the SNTF data and recognizes it as an “objectâ€.
Extraverted functions do seem to be taken as "perceptions" (even if a judging function!) Like Te types will often be the one to say "that's just the way it is!" when you question the logic or purpose of their decisions, or decisions they are upholding. They can never admit any subjective factor in the matter, and even though the functional perspective may be by definition "objective", there's still a "subject" present, that has to receive and process the data).
Fe also takes its judgements as "givens"; like my wife saying why the house MUST be cleaned, especially when others are coming over. The data will likely be filled in by the associated perception function.
So to apply the cathexis concept to the functions (starting with Feeling, which deals directly with the "human" aspect of the ego):
Fi: Those are my feelings I see in the other person ("good" or "bad"). Let me respond as I would want to be responded to
Fe: Those are not my feelings, but let me take them as my own ("good" or "bad") and respond to what they are expressing
Ti: Those are my thoughts, ("correct"; take as confirmation) or not my thoughts ("incorrect"; ignore or fix)
Te: Those are not my thoughts, but let me take them as my own ("correct", and whatever doesn't carry the same weight is "incorrect").
(We can see there, for Feeling, the judgment is determined directly by the emotional state of self or others, while for Thinking, it's about matching one thought with another).
Si: That's my experience (what "is"); let me instruct others accordingly. If it "isn't" my experience, I'll be slow to trust it
Se: That's not my experience; let me take it as my own, anew (even if I've taken it on before)
Ni: That's my image of potential outcomes or the big picture, let me find a way to inform others from it
Ne: That's not my image of potential outcomes or the big picture (it's implied by the object itself), but let me take it as my own
Things can be either "ego cathected", where we experience them as part of ourselves, (and project them outward onto other people or objects, which are then filtered through the subjective view), or "object cathected" where we see them as "not me", but nevertheless take them in (introject), where they become "internal objects", that (according to Jung), the subject merges himself with.
Object cathected data is said to be taken as “perceptionsâ€, while ego cathected data is recognized as your own “thoughts".
(So with introverted function, the ego cathects S, N, T or F data; and I'm wondering if we always recognize the perspective as our own thought? Sometimes it seems as if we don't; so I'm wondering if that might be part of what's “unconscious†about introverted functions. Perhaps, what's conscious is the object cathexis of the associated extraverted function [other preferred function, or tandem mate, or either/both?] where the ego object cathects the SNTF data and recognizes it as an “objectâ€.
Extraverted functions do seem to be taken as "perceptions" (even if a judging function!) Like Te types will often be the one to say "that's just the way it is!" when you question the logic or purpose of their decisions, or decisions they are upholding. They can never admit any subjective factor in the matter, and even though the functional perspective may be by definition "objective", there's still a "subject" present, that has to receive and process the data).
Fe also takes its judgements as "givens"; like my wife saying why the house MUST be cleaned, especially when others are coming over. The data will likely be filled in by the associated perception function.
So to apply the cathexis concept to the functions (starting with Feeling, which deals directly with the "human" aspect of the ego):
Fi: Those are my feelings I see in the other person ("good" or "bad"). Let me respond as I would want to be responded to
Fe: Those are not my feelings, but let me take them as my own ("good" or "bad") and respond to what they are expressing
Ti: Those are my thoughts, ("correct"; take as confirmation) or not my thoughts ("incorrect"; ignore or fix)
Te: Those are not my thoughts, but let me take them as my own ("correct", and whatever doesn't carry the same weight is "incorrect").
(We can see there, for Feeling, the judgment is determined directly by the emotional state of self or others, while for Thinking, it's about matching one thought with another).
Si: That's my experience (what "is"); let me instruct others accordingly. If it "isn't" my experience, I'll be slow to trust it
Se: That's not my experience; let me take it as my own, anew (even if I've taken it on before)
Ni: That's my image of potential outcomes or the big picture, let me find a way to inform others from it
Ne: That's not my image of potential outcomes or the big picture (it's implied by the object itself), but let me take it as my own
