Eric B
ⒺⓉⒷ
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,621
- MBTI Type
- INTP
- Enneagram
- 548
- Instinctual Variant
- sp/sx
This picks up on what I had originally tacked onto the old Archetypes of the Functions thread, and seeing how significant this really is to type, it deserved to be its own topic.
Another way to understand complexes (which divide the ego and connect to the functions), are as "ego-states". The ego (our main sense of "I", and itself a “complexâ€) is divided into numerous “states†representing discrete (though not totally conscious as such) lesser senses of “I†(which are also complexes), partially dissociated from each other. ("Dissociation" is what becomes the familiar "multiple personality" disorders when it is too great, yet is quite normal in lesser degrees. This paper: "Ego Strengthening and Ego Surrender", Diane Zimberoff, M.A. and David Hartman, MSW explains this well).
One ego state can be anger at someone, and another can be happiness, or sadness, amorous, etc. These all are kinds of "ruling patterns" (archetypes) connected to the limbic system of emotions. Through them, we can have different expressions of "I" that feel different things.
Regarding type preferences, some of these ego states will determine how reality is divided by consciousness. These are what John Beebe has outlined as being associated with the eight functions for each type. Thus, they are what "use" [so to speak] various functions as well, and are what will set the order all eight have been placed in, based on the level of consciousness they [the complexes] represent. (This is still not necessarily a hard "order" of relative "strength", though).
The ego itself will determine the dominant function and attitude, through one state, which will be the main achiever, and will set apart in reality a predominant means of either taking in information (perception) or making decisions with it (judgment), and either an individual or environmental focus of that process.
Another ego state, will be about support (to the ego’s agenda, or to others), and this (for the sake of providing balance to the dominant standpoint) will generally see reality through an opposite mode of taking in or making decisions with the data, and the opposite individual or environmental orientation, from the dominant. (i.e. Supplying data for or “informing†one’s dominant judgment, or organizing one’s dominant perceptions with rational assessments, and keeping us in touch with both inner and outer realms).
So to use the archetype/complex names, the dominant function will be connected with a "Heroic" complex (consisting of ego states of "heroically" solving problems, and advancing our ego's agendas); and the strong "Good Parent" complex (ego states of being helpful to others) will associate with the auxiliary. The two resulting “function-attitudes†then define the “typeâ€.
Outside of these ego states, the function-attitudes (i.e. judgment or perception functions and individual or environmental orientation combinations) remain either undifferentiated (just general processes everyone does, apart from any particular ego-state), or may become associated with certain other ego states which are basically reflections of the first two.
So in Beebe's theory, six other complexes will carry the remaining six function-attitudes, in an order mirroring and/or "shadowing" these first two.
Tertiary: a more childlike ego-state which reflecting the “supporting†state will tend to look up to others and find relief, using the function and orientation opposite the supporting one.
Next is an ego state conveying a sense of “inferiorityâ€, which also realizes our place in the universe is very small (though ego usually fights this), and yet senses hypothetical “completeness†through it. This will see life through the function and orientation opposite the dominant.
The remaining ego states and associated functions parallel the first four. They are negative versions of them, and the functions are the same, but bearing the opposite orientation from the first four, which had been suppressed from consciousness in preferring the other orientations.
A sort of “negative hero†dealing with perceived obstruction
A negative “parent†dealing with negation of ego’s agenda
A negative “child†dealing with perceived double binds
A state dealing with ego’s fear of its own destruction
So we can think of lesser senses of "I" that constellate and tend to "use" these other functions, at certain times.
This, is what type is really all about, and how to know what is what when looking at function "usage".
So the question to ask is:
When doing a particular activity associated with a function, which ego state are you in?
If, when “seeing†something just for what it is, you're not in a particular state associated with ego development, then it doesn't “count†as a function “useâ€. Or, we could say it's a very “general†rather than “special†use.
If it's a state of heroically solving a problem or otherwise advancing a specific ego-agenda, then you could take that as an evidence of Se being dominant. So the same goes for the other seven archetypal positions.
(Now it becomes a matter of sorting out which ego state you're in)
So, to run through all the functions:
Receiving information through the senses (from the environment [e]), simply as a sentient being
versus
Paying special attention to details of the information received through the senses, because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
[Now, it will get a bit repetitive, but this is to show, that for each of these functions, this is what we must ask]
Recalling a tangible fact from individual recollection (which all sentient beings are supplied with)
versus
Paying special attention to the details of learned/memorized fact because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Comparing one pattern to another in the environment [e] to infer interconnections [N]
versus
Paying special attention to finding meanings through connections because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Inferring [N] from an individual impression of something (for example, "hunches")
versus
Paying special attention to hunches and other "just know"ings because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging true or false [T] by an environmental necessity or demand ([e]such as "efficiency", and ordering things accordingly)
versus
Paying special attention to the need to [impersonally] order efficiently because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging true or false [T] by one's own individual experience ( including what's learned from nature)
versus
Paying special attention to universal impersonal principles because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging good or bad [F] by an environmental necessity or demand ([e] like group harmony, introjecting someone's pain, etc)
versus
Paying special attention to interpersonal likes and needs because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging good or bad [F] by one's own individual experience ( like putting ourselves in someone else's shoes)
versus
Paying special attention to universal personal likes and needs because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Another way to understand complexes (which divide the ego and connect to the functions), are as "ego-states". The ego (our main sense of "I", and itself a “complexâ€) is divided into numerous “states†representing discrete (though not totally conscious as such) lesser senses of “I†(which are also complexes), partially dissociated from each other. ("Dissociation" is what becomes the familiar "multiple personality" disorders when it is too great, yet is quite normal in lesser degrees. This paper: "Ego Strengthening and Ego Surrender", Diane Zimberoff, M.A. and David Hartman, MSW explains this well).
One ego state can be anger at someone, and another can be happiness, or sadness, amorous, etc. These all are kinds of "ruling patterns" (archetypes) connected to the limbic system of emotions. Through them, we can have different expressions of "I" that feel different things.
Regarding type preferences, some of these ego states will determine how reality is divided by consciousness. These are what John Beebe has outlined as being associated with the eight functions for each type. Thus, they are what "use" [so to speak] various functions as well, and are what will set the order all eight have been placed in, based on the level of consciousness they [the complexes] represent. (This is still not necessarily a hard "order" of relative "strength", though).
The ego itself will determine the dominant function and attitude, through one state, which will be the main achiever, and will set apart in reality a predominant means of either taking in information (perception) or making decisions with it (judgment), and either an individual or environmental focus of that process.
Another ego state, will be about support (to the ego’s agenda, or to others), and this (for the sake of providing balance to the dominant standpoint) will generally see reality through an opposite mode of taking in or making decisions with the data, and the opposite individual or environmental orientation, from the dominant. (i.e. Supplying data for or “informing†one’s dominant judgment, or organizing one’s dominant perceptions with rational assessments, and keeping us in touch with both inner and outer realms).
So to use the archetype/complex names, the dominant function will be connected with a "Heroic" complex (consisting of ego states of "heroically" solving problems, and advancing our ego's agendas); and the strong "Good Parent" complex (ego states of being helpful to others) will associate with the auxiliary. The two resulting “function-attitudes†then define the “typeâ€.
Outside of these ego states, the function-attitudes (i.e. judgment or perception functions and individual or environmental orientation combinations) remain either undifferentiated (just general processes everyone does, apart from any particular ego-state), or may become associated with certain other ego states which are basically reflections of the first two.
So in Beebe's theory, six other complexes will carry the remaining six function-attitudes, in an order mirroring and/or "shadowing" these first two.
Tertiary: a more childlike ego-state which reflecting the “supporting†state will tend to look up to others and find relief, using the function and orientation opposite the supporting one.
Next is an ego state conveying a sense of “inferiorityâ€, which also realizes our place in the universe is very small (though ego usually fights this), and yet senses hypothetical “completeness†through it. This will see life through the function and orientation opposite the dominant.
The remaining ego states and associated functions parallel the first four. They are negative versions of them, and the functions are the same, but bearing the opposite orientation from the first four, which had been suppressed from consciousness in preferring the other orientations.
A sort of “negative hero†dealing with perceived obstruction
A negative “parent†dealing with negation of ego’s agenda
A negative “child†dealing with perceived double binds
A state dealing with ego’s fear of its own destruction
So we can think of lesser senses of "I" that constellate and tend to "use" these other functions, at certain times.
This, is what type is really all about, and how to know what is what when looking at function "usage".
So the question to ask is:
When doing a particular activity associated with a function, which ego state are you in?
If, when “seeing†something just for what it is, you're not in a particular state associated with ego development, then it doesn't “count†as a function “useâ€. Or, we could say it's a very “general†rather than “special†use.
If it's a state of heroically solving a problem or otherwise advancing a specific ego-agenda, then you could take that as an evidence of Se being dominant. So the same goes for the other seven archetypal positions.
(Now it becomes a matter of sorting out which ego state you're in)
So, to run through all the functions:
Receiving information through the senses
versus
Paying special attention to details of the information received through the senses, because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
[Now, it will get a bit repetitive, but this is to show, that for each of these functions, this is what we must ask]
Recalling a tangible fact
versus
Paying special attention to the details of learned/memorized fact because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
[/FONT][/COLOR]
Comparing one pattern to another in the environment [e] to infer interconnections [N]
versus
Paying special attention to finding meanings through connections because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Inferring [N] from an individual impression of something (for example, "hunches")
versus
Paying special attention to hunches and other "just know"ings because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred judgment
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging true or false [T] by an environmental necessity or demand ([e]such as "efficiency", and ordering things accordingly)
versus
Paying special attention to the need to [impersonally] order efficiently because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging true or false [T] by one's own individual experience ( including what's learned from nature)
versus
Paying special attention to universal impersonal principles because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging good or bad [F] by an environmental necessity or demand ([e] like group harmony, introjecting someone's pain, etc)
versus
Paying special attention to interpersonal likes and needs because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Judging good or bad [F] by one's own individual experience ( like putting ourselves in someone else's shoes)
versus
Paying special attention to universal personal likes and needs because:
It's ego's favorite way to approach life (“heroic†state)
It's what ego uses in its state of supporting its preferred perception
It's what the ego uses in its state of finding relief
It's what the ego feels a state of being particularly “inferior†in
Ego feels obstructed or needs to broaden its dominant standpoint
Ego feels negated (often from one-sidedness of the dominant standpoint)
Ego feels double bound (and needs to turn the tables on the offender)
Ego feels threatened with destruction (usually exaggerated)
Last edited: