Please Explain The Logic... Why Cant Someone Be An INNP? Or ESSJ?

[raskol]

I don't know why there is a common association between the anima/animus and the inferior function. I would associate the inferior with the shadow (I think) and the unconscious functions, especially the 5th functions, with the anima (pretty sure).

The anima is the unconscious feminine side: the inferior (fourth) function and the tertiary as type. The fifth function would be the nemesis, according to Berens' system.

 

[tommyc]

The functions most associated with the ego are the first and second functions (especially the first).

Yes, this makes sense. The less attachment to ego you have, the less strongly you use each function, down the list. Id say Im an Introverted Intuitive. Beyond that its hard to say. I dont display big levels of Extraverted Feeling or Thinking. Its not even that Im balanced between both - its that I dont seem to use either very much. Perhaps its that the rest of my functions beyond the first just operate vaguely at the same low level.

As regards to transcendence being all eight functions working in unison - I can see that. Another way of seeing that is you let go of all your functions, so NONE are active. Or none are dominant - they are entirely fluid.

Of all the functions, I would say Extraverted Sensing seems closest to non-being. Seeing the outside world purely for what it is, without subjective interpretation.

 

[Pionart]

The anima is the unconscious feminine side: the inferior (fourth) function and the tertiary as type. The fifth function would be the nemesis, according to Berens' system.

Yeah but I mean... Berens' system doesn't seem to line up with reality, at least from my experience.

 

[raskol]

Yeah but I mean... Berens' system doesn't seem to line up with reality, at least from my experience.

I don't know enough to kick it--yet. I find it intriguing and see where it leads me. And I think Beebe's function stack allows for the same distinctions.

But in your case, don't you resonate at all with a by-the-book superego (ISTJ), eccentric shadow self (ENFP) and a femme fatale anima (ESTP)? With that setup, your inner world would seem rather lively.

 

[Pionart]

Yes, this makes sense. The less attachment to ego you have, the less strongly you use each function, down the list. Id say Im an Introverted Intuitive. Beyond that its hard to say. I dont display big levels of Extraverted Feeling or Thinking. Its not even that Im balanced between both - its that I dont seem to use either very much. Perhaps its that the rest of my functions beyond the first just operate vaguely at the same low level.

As regards to transcendence being all eight functions working in unison - I can see that. Another way of seeing that is you let go of all your functions, so NONE are active. Or none are dominant - they are entirely fluid.

Of all the functions, I would say Extraverted Sensing seems closest to non-being. Seeing the outside world purely for what it is, without subjective interpretation.

Notice in your OP of this thread you started by mentioning a developing process, using terms like "delve deeper", "understand", (Ni), then your next paragraph is heavily socially oriented, and your third+fourth, concern, as you said yourself, internal logic.

Hence you displayed an Ni-Fe-Ti function order, and if that one post is indicative of your general personality, it would make you an INFJ.


What's interesting about the functions is that all 8 are in an equal standing, but at the same time, Se seems most linked to physiological processes and Ni seems most linked to spiritual processes, so in terms of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, no function is in its own right associated with higher level needs than any other, but yet conceptually there does seem to be an association. It's quite intriguing.

Also, self-actualisation is the functions working in unison, whereas self-transcendence does in a sense let go of them.* However, for a higher level need to be active, all needs below it must also be active, so the cognitive functions remain active, they are just not the main focus.


* this is my own speculation about it, and I could be at least partially incorrect about how I'm framing things

 

[Pionart]

I don't know enough to kick it--yet. I find it intriguing and see where it leads me. And I think Beebe's function stack allows for the same distinctions.

But in your case, don't you resonate at all with a by-the-book superego (ISTJ), eccentric shadow self (ENFP) and a femme fatale anima (ESTP)? With that setup, your inner world would seem rather lively.

I resonate with an STP alter-ego (roughly shadow self) and ENFP anima. I'm not familiar with the superego part of the equation.

--

Your anima would resemble the kinds of people you're attracted to, correct? So how can ESTP be the INFJ's anima, when there's been mention of NFPs attracting NFJs?

 

[raskol]

I resonate with an STP alter-ego (roughly shadow self) and ENFP anima.

ESTP shadow and ENFP anima are generated by the ISTJ ego, following that model.

I'm not familiar with the superego part of the equation.

That would be the demon (eighth) and trickster (seventh) conjoined, the most feared combination imaginable for your type. How do you experience your superego?

 

[Pionart]

ESTP shadow and ENFP anima are generated by the ISTJ ego, following that model.

That would be the demon (eighth) and trickster (seventh) conjoined, the most feared combination imaginable for your type. How do you experience your superego?

I haven't processed my self-perception through the concept of superego, so I couldn't say for sure...

However, my Si constantly comes up in the form of unpleasant memories where I feel I did the wrong thing.

 

[raskol]

I haven't processed my self-perception through the concept of superego, so I couldn't say for sure...

However, my Si constantly comes up in the form of unpleasant memories where I feel I did the wrong thing.

That would be it, the uncontrollable force that incites fear, shame, and guilt in accordance with our value system. And that actually falls in line with the INFJ superego (ISTJ), even though it would give you ENFP shadow and ESTP anima. But, interestingly enough, it all appears to fall in line if we reverse the categories of shadow and anima.

Edit: In defense of the above model, I think it follows from the original Jungian approach that the shadow is a reversal of your ego--NiFe facing NeFi--while the anima is a manifestation of your inferior psychological function pair, SeTi

 

[tommyc]

Also, self-actualisation is the functions working in unison, whereas self-transcendence does in a sense let go of them.*

I know you say that Perceiving is no more 'enlightened' than Judging but Im still not sure. Judging, whether with feeling or thought, is interpreting your perceptions, putting a spin on them to make them useful for yourself and others. It seems reasonable to think the less your judging function is engaged, the more purely you perceive the world, and the greater awareness you will have. Perhaps Enlightenment is a letting go of Judging entirely, and either a fusing of Sensing and Intuition in both the introverted and extroverted sides, or a transcendent state of perception which rises above both. But I know you take a different opinion.

Annnyway, I have one more question to ask, and this relates to more mundane MBTI stuff. How does a type which leads with a judging function work? My friend is INFP - his dominant process is Introverted Feeling. But wouldnt this mean he's judging perceptions he hasnt taken in yet?

 

[Pionart]

That would be it, the uncontrollable force that incites fear, shame, and guilt in accordance with our value system. And that actually falls in line with the INFJ superego (ISTJ), even though it would give you ENFP shadow and ESTP anima. But, interestingly enough, it all appears to fall in line if we reverse the categories of shadow and anima.

Edit: In defense of the above model, I think it follows from the original Jungian approach that the shadow is a reversal of your ego--NiFe facing NeFi--while the anima is a manifestation of your inferior psychological function pair, SeTi

Check out the diagram in this post https://www.typologycentral.com/for...3318-interview-dario-nardi-7.html#post2930142

It corroborates what I'm saying about the anima being more unconscious than the shadow. Also, it uses self instead of super-ego, and I'm familiar with that approach, however I do see possible merit to the super-ego concept.

 

[Pionart]

I know you say that Perceiving is no more 'enlightened' than Judging but Im still not sure. Judging, whether with feeling or thought, is interpreting your perceptions, putting a spin on them to make them useful for yourself and others. It seems reasonable to think the less your judging function is engaged, the more purely you perceive the world, and the greater awareness you will have. Perhaps Enlightenment is a letting go of Judging entirely, and either a fusing of Sensing and Intuition in both the introverted and extroverted sides, or a transcendent state of perception which rises above both. But I know you take a different opinion.

Annnyway, I have one more question to ask, and this relates to more mundane MBTI stuff. How does a type which leads with a judging function work? My friend is INFP - his dominant process is Introverted Feeling. Does this mean he judges his perceptions before he's even taken them in?

A type which leads with introverted judgement starts with a stance, framework, belief - and stimuli is automatically parsed through that.

For a type leading with extroverted judgement, they start with the dynamics of an externalised environment (either the actual environment, or the environment of projected thoughts), and their viewpoint they conjure is based directly on that.

--

You can think of function order as like a filtering process. You start with raw information coming into the mind which has only undergone rather generic processing, and then that is processed by the first function. What remains is processed by the second, and so on down to the 8th.

 

[tommyc]

Oh, I thought I was following you but you lost me on the last paragraph

For it seems to me that the Perceiving function IS the raw information coming into the mind - either directly (sensor) or indirectly (intuitive).

How about this?: leading with a judgement process means you set your filter up first, and then take in information with the perceiving process. Whereas with a perceiving process first you take in perceptions unedited, as raw data: once its in, you decide to filter it using thought or feeling.

Thus the person who leads with perceiving is more in touch with the world as it is - he takes in more raw perception. Perhaps he could be said to be more present? More objective?

 

[raskol]

Check out the diagram in this post https://www.typologycentral.com/for...3318-interview-dario-nardi-7.html#post2930142

Interesting stuff. I'll make sure to read that thread.

It corroborates what I'm saying about the anima being more unconscious than the shadow.

The model I use presumes that the anima is subconscious (slightly conscious) and that it therefore manifests in the inferior function. The problem with Isabel Myers' terminology, in this case, is that she placed the shadow in the least conscious (fourth) function, which runs counter to Jungian principles.

Also, it uses self instead of super-ego, and I'm familiar with that approach, however I do see possible merit to the super-ego concept.

Either term is fine. The key is to allocate the boundaries of our internal world.

 

[Pionart]

Oh, I thought I was following you but you lost me on the last paragraph

For it seems to me that the Perceiving function IS the raw information coming into the mind - either directly (sensor) or indirectly (intuitive).

How about this?: leading with a judgement process means you set your filter up first, and then take in information with the perceiving process. Whereas with a perceiving process first you take in perceptions unedited, as raw data: once its in, you decide to filter it using thought or feeling.

Thus the person who leads with perceiving is more in touch with the world as it is - he takes in more raw perception. Perhaps he could be said to be more present? More objective?

More "present" and "objective" would only apply to extroverted perception, it wouldn't apply to introverted perception. Introverted functions are subjective, and introverted perception in particular seems to operate across various points of the timeline, rather than the present.

The raw information that comes to a person is going to be basically the same for two different people dealing with the same situation, isn't it? So it wouldn't be based in any function.

Even Se applies a transformation to raw information, at least that's my impression of it. But it does seem the closest to the raw information. I can't clarify too much further here as I haven't followed the train of thought far enough yet.

 

[Pionart]

Interesting stuff. I'll make sure to read that thread.

The model I use presumes that the anima is subconscious (slightly conscious) and that it therefore manifests in the inferior function. The problem with Isabel Myers' terminology, in this case, is that she placed the shadow in the least conscious (fourth) function, which runs counter to Jungian principles.

Either term is fine. The key is to allocate the boundaries of our internal world.

The diagram in the post I linked - and I assume it reflects Jung's writings accurately, though it may not - puts the shadow as between consciousness and unconsciousness, whereas the anima is between the personal and collective unconscious. So that would make the shadow subconscious, and thus associated for example with the inferior function, but the anima is being wholly unconscious.

 

[raskol]

The diagram in the post I linked - and I assume it reflects Jung's writings accurately, though it may not - puts the shadow as between consciousness and unconsciousness, whereas the anima is between the personal and collective unconscious. So that would make the shadow subconscious, and thus associated for example with the inferior function, but the anima is being wholly unconscious.

But I followed the diagram, which actually supports the model I've used thus far. INFJ becomes ENFP shadow, both sharing the same temperament (NF), which puts them significantly closer in type than ESTP anima (inverted dichotomy). Moreover, your anima's dominant function is slightly conscious (inferior to the ego), as we, if ever so slightly, internalize our identification with the opposite sex. This is depicted in the diagram close to the dotted line separating the conscious and the unconscious.

 

[tommyc]

Even Se applies a transformation to raw information, at least that's my impression of it.

Im not sure if Se applies a transformation, but it certainly applies a limit on your perception. Ie you are only taking in perception directly, via your five senses. Were you to truly open up and be completely perceptive, completely present, you would need to also be perceiving indirectly through your unconscious - Intuition. Both would need to be firing, simultaneously.

More "present" and "objective" would only apply to extroverted perception, it wouldn't apply to introverted perception. Introverted functions are subjective, and introverted perception in particular seems to operate across various points of the timeline, rather than the present.

Perhaps, yes. I cant quite get my head around the difference between the two. How you can perceive things extroverted or introverted. Or perhaps as you say, raw perception is done the same by everyone - intuition (or sensing) is a sort of secondary perception, which can be done in an extroverted or introverted way. I guess this is what youre saying.

 

[Pionart]

Im not sure if Se applies a transformation, but it certainly applies a limit on your perception. Ie you are only taking in perception directly, via your five senses. Were you to truly open up and be completely perceptive, completely present, you would need to also be perceiving indirectly through your unconscious - Intuition. Both would need to be firing, simultaneously.



Perhaps, yes. I cant quite get my head around the difference between the two. How you can perceive things extroverted or introverted. Or perhaps as you say, raw perception is done the same by everyone - intuition (or sensing) is a sort of secondary perception, which can be done in an extroverted or introverted way. I guess this is what youre saying.

I've given some thought to the matter, and here is my take on it.

When speaking of raw information, I am referring to the information from the senses which has not undergone further processing.

So, take the example of sight. From a raw perspective, the only information that you are getting from sight is a sea of colour. That's it. Now, say you're looking at a chair. From a raw perspective, all you're seeing is the brown of the wood in a particular shape. What Se does is that it perceives that you are staring at a chair - i.e. it integrates the information from the senses into a whole object. Note that it doesn't actually call it a chair, because a) Se it non-verbal, and b) Se doesn't generalise, it just perceives the object in front of it which we know as a chair.

It is also perceives salience - different features of the environment will stand out more than others, and it naturally focuses on what stands out the most (but also scans the environment in general to see what is there). When considering raw processing, nothing really stands out.

So, I am against the idea that extroverted sensing is somehow equivalent to the 5 senses. I believe that the Sensing functions are not actually the senses, but are a layer of processing which differentiates one object from another.

--

Check this out:

Sensation (psychology) - Wikipedia

Sensation is an animal's, including humans', detection of external or internal stimulation (e.g., eyes detecting light waves, ears detecting sound waves). It is different from perception, which is about making sense of, or describing, the stimulation (e.g., seeing a chair, hearing a guitar).

So, I believe that the term "Sensation" in reference to a particular (Jungian) cognitive function(s) is a misleading term, because it's not actually sensation, it's a form of perception.

--

Furthermore, this part may be distinguishing extroverted from introverted perception:

Perception can be split into two processes, [5]

(1) processing the sensory input, which transforms these low-level information to higher-level information (e.g., extracts shapes for object recognition);
(2) processing which is connected with a person's concepts and expectations (or knowledge), restorative and selective mechanisms (such as attention) that influence perception.

However, I would like each of those 2 components to be further divided into their S (detail) and N (pattern) forms.

 

[hurl3y4456]

Lets' suppose someone is INNP (....>Ne > Ni >....). We know that our minds can divert energy internally or externally....If more energy is directed inward, then less energy is directed outward. For intuition to be initiated, it needs a reference point. Both Ne and Ni are fed by external input over time, however, Ni seeks closure whereas Ne seeks expansion. Imagine your life is composed of a sphere of collected input (xyz plane) which have a fixed density. Ni is an evolving function meaning that it will pull a multitude of past data points over time stored within subconscious and create an singular point of higher density. Ne is a dissipating function meaning that it will transcend the initial data points and create endless possibilities that diverge from the initial input, causing the original density to dissipate. The rate of dissipation depends on the strength of Ne usage....If it's a dominant function, then the rate will be higher relative to secondary only due to usage frequency. Now, since Ne succeeds Ni in this case, it will follow that the density of each original input will decrease, which implies that the frequency of Ni usage is greatly increased( a certain density is required to initiate). Thus, these two functions are opposing in terms of frequency, which contradicts the function orientation.