• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.

The Sixth Function

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#1
Dario Nardi claims that the sixth function (Ni for the INTP, archtypically known as the "Good Parent") plays a specific role in the psyche as follows. In this video he brings up the example of the INTP and claims that those who integrate/develop Ni can have a vision and a purpose about the future, and can for example write a book or develop a theory that can have a large impact on society. However those INTP's who don't develop their Ni can, for example, dabble in ESP for fun, or won't have a clear vision of what they'll be doing in five years, or will jump from interest to interest (these are all his examples of immature Ni). Ultimately he believes that the INTP (in this Ni developed example) is still an INTP (compute ... compute ... compute), but with a well developed Ni there's a sense of energy and purpose 'diffused through the background', which is missing from the less developed Ni INTP.

I'm not entirely sure what to make of this. Here's the video (note the guys who got him on are terrible interviewers)

https://youtu.be/bHJDESShlyo?t=24m50s

Note that starting at a cue point doesn't work with the forum, so fast forward to 24 minutes 50 seconds for the sixth function part.

(split from "Getting Unstuck, evolution and growth)
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,290
#2
Hmm. But those qualities (of developing a vision of the future, dabbling with ESP for fun, having a clear 5+ year plan, etc) can easily develop in a TiNe, or any type, without the need for Ni to be considered.

The way he talks about these qualities is kinda going back to the behaviorisms (as opposed to function dynamics), which any type can participate in. So I'm a little confused as to why he'd call it "Ni". Does he see Ni-esque activity in the brain too?

I think he comes from something more like Beebe's 8 function model? (I saw a mention to the "Good Parent" there, I think) That would influence this logical deduction path too.

Sixth Function

If a theory has a concise explanation of function dynamics, then there's no need to revert to this sort of thinking. If I may I'll give my take on the idea. :)

A TiNe-Si, such as Noam Chomsky, can very easily have a vision of the future which spans far beyond 5 years in both future/past directions. For those unfamiliar, the TiNe-Si subtype is just another way of saying a TiNe with strong development of, and reliance on, their Si.

Si, being a worldview function, will embed qualities of breadth/scope/context/paradigm into the TiNe, which offsets much of the lack of anchoring that Ne initially brings. But usually TiNe-Si aren't seen until they're into their 40's or 50's. So a 40 year old TiNe can go toe-to-toe with an NiTe in terms of visionary ideas.

But part of the reason they can is because the TiNe here doesn't have to lose the general attitude of being I+N+T, so their use of Si is always embedded into a mental paradigm that's largely abstract (N) and speculative in nature. The Si of the TiNe isn't the same as the Si of the SiFe, and so the TiNe-Si will appear to mimic Ni in surface statements. But it always lacks the raw hardware of Ni.

For example, with myself I've believed for years now that the singularity will certainly happen, I've been a supporter of the near arrival of fully automated vehicles, electric vehicles, solar panels and the 10-15 year arrival of strong A.I. I've held these positions even when they were a lot less popular and still fringe, because of a mix of logical deduction (Ti), a fascination with new ideas (Ne), and a projecting forward of the lessons and patterns of history (Si) - as in the exponential growth of technology seen in smartphones and computers. This is Ti+Ne+Si working together.
 

Yellow

for the glory of satan
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
2,865
Location
127.0.0.1
#3
I'm not entirely sure what to make of it either, to be honest.

I have two possible conclusions at the moment:

1. Ni allows people to be confident with their impulses/intuition. Something INTPs naturally lack. Obviously, there's nothing novel about saying being more rounded is a strength.

I guess this goes back to what MBTI is fundamentally missing in terms of personality dimensions. Before delving into 5th, 6th, etc. functions, I'd venture to guess that there are other dimensions in play, which muddy the stack a bit. It's possible that they mimic the pseudodevelopment of opposing functions.

2. They may be confusing actual functioning with shapshifting. We can wear different hats. I'm sure most adult INTPs can fake Ni and/or Te when necessary (I assume it's the Fe that makes this possible).

An INTP who can fake confidence and orderliness (for example) could go very far.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#4
Hmm. But those qualities (of developing a vision of the future, dabbling with ESP for fun, having a clear 5+ year plan, etc) can easily develop in a TiNe, or any type, without the need for Ni to be considered.
Well, yes, but that's true of all thoughts in a psyche with free will. Here I think he just uses it as an example to illustrate the kind of thinking that goes on with this case.

The way he talks about these qualities is kinda going back to the behaviorisms (as opposed to function dynamics), which any type can participate in. So I'm a little confused as to why he'd call it "Ni". Does he see Ni-esque activity in the brain too?
That's his research, he hooks up a EEG to people of different types and has them perform various tasks. From this he sees differences and similarities in different types. For example, he found that ENFP's (of all the types) have the most similar brain activity (region wise) to each other.

I think he comes from something more like Beebe's 8 function model?
Yes that's exactly what he's discussing here. He's a neuroscientist with MBTI certification.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#5
I guess this goes back to what MBTI is fundamentally missing in terms of personality dimensions. Before delving into 5th, 6th, etc. functions, I'd venture to guess that there are other dimensions in play, which muddy the stack a bit. It's possible that they mimic the pseudodevelopment of opposing functions.

2. They may be confusing actual functioning with shapshifting. We can wear different hats. I'm sure most adult INTPs can fake Ni and/or Te when necessary (I assume it's the Fe that makes this possible).

An INTP who can fake confidence and orderliness (for example) could go very far.
I think MBTI/Jung's typeology is clear - when using your top functions you get energy from them. When using the inferior/shadow it takes energy, with the important caveat that the latter do operate in the background unconsciously to some degree.

So can a INTP 'fake' or perform Ni actions? Of course, we can do anything. Do people perform their inferior/shadow functions consistently? No that's not observed. Spontaneously? Yes, occasionally, especially the inferior bursts out throughout the day. You see Fe/INTP and Se/INFJ come out on it's own in some kind of explosive way. Can an INTP attempt Fe consciously? Of course, but usually not willingly, and not for long. Unless they're experiencing the Grip or some Type suppression.

I do believe the shadow functions operate unconsciously. The best example I have is Se for an INTP. I got in an online discussion with a MBTI certified practitioner about this. "INTP's express Se as the trickster, how so?" Made no sense to me, until she pointed out how INFP/INTP can have a juvenile sense of humor when it comes to the physical. I.e. gross gag gifts, slapstick and the like. This reminded me of how much I like slapstick and stupid humor.

Ni is a subtle hard to understand function, which makes this interpretation less obvious.
 

PmjPmj

Full of stars.
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,375
Location
UK
#6
Thanks, Architect. I don't have time right this second to listen to the podcast but I will do at some point.

Not being an INTP I likely won't have much of value to offer. What I will say however is that I'm so obviously and constantly focused on the distant future that I hadn't ever really considered what it'd be like to exist closer to the present moment. It's little more than a novel idea to me, because my MO is to exist 'out there', somewhere.

Te (and Se, of course) reels me back to the here and now when I need to get something done, but I'd wager that a good 70% of my time is spent contemplating all things future-related.

I assumed that was an N thing - not exclusively Ni.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#7
Thanks, Architect. I don't have time right this second to listen to the podcast but I will do at some point.
The podcasters are really bad - Dario was a good sport but they had no idea what they were doing.

Not being an INTP I likely won't have much of value to offer.
Do you have any insight as to what your sixth function may or may not do for you? The example above is INTP, but presumably the idea carries across types in some way.
 

PmjPmj

Full of stars.
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,375
Location
UK
#8
Do you have any insight as to what your sixth function may or may not do for you? The example above is INTP, but presumably the idea carries across types in some way.
Just saw a section of the video; I'd need to further explore the hypothesis because my cursory glance has me unsure as to whether we're dealing with the oft touted linear model or something else. If we're talking about Ti for the INTJ, then I'm almost certain it'll be kicking around in there not really doing a great deal.

What they mention briefly about (paraphrasing) INTJs holding on to lots of models but being quite undisciplined about that (not exploring them in depth; taking a 'yeah, this sounds about right' approach) was bang on, in my experience. I would therefore assume that, when developed, my sixth function (again, assuming Ti) would help to organise/reorganise those systems, more deeply understand them and thus better integrate them.

Sorry, shitpost from hip as per - have to run now.

Will think more on this and explore when I can.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#9
Just saw a section of the video; I'd need to further explore the hypothesis because my cursory glance has me unsure as to whether we're dealing with the oft touted linear model or something else. If we're talking about Ti for the INTJ.
Dario is an INTJ so might be a good person to explore his thoughts on the type.
 

Animekitty

World A.I. transfomantion is Near
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
5,434
Location
4D Archaeology computer grid
#10
From the IQ test I took I understand the parietal and frontal lobes control intelligence. INTP's are deep thinkers because they use both sides of their brains. The test I took says I only use 2 areas that INTP's use all 4 areas. My right dorsal stream is highly efferent (around 130 IQ). My left dorsal stream is very weak (80 IQ). The only sides of my least brain I use effectively are F3 and T5. It would be nice if I could sustain deep thinking for a long time but I can't.

My idea for A.I. is to do with a fractal hierarchy of self-reference loops. Because I have problems thinking (limited Ti). I do not understand computer programming. I do understand general intelligence. My brain is just asymmetrical in how it functionally operates.

The blue areas are what my brain is good at. They are the functionally efficient areas.

P3 is IQ 80
P4 is IQ 130

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3263563/

 

PmjPmj

Full of stars.
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,375
Location
UK
#11

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#12
Ja, I have been fortunate enough to speak with him one on one last year. Nice / interesting guy.
Neat, how did that work out?
 

PmjPmj

Full of stars.
Joined
Sep 18, 2012
Messages
1,375
Location
UK
#13
Not as well as I'd hoped - I did plan to meet him at the BAPT conference last summer (I was going to do the EEG stuff with him) but eventually decided not to attend. Perhaps unsurprisingly I managed to piss off some of the higher-ups in the group (OPP et al.) so I thought I'd be best keeping away.

He's definitely a cool guy, though. Very down to earth.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#14
Perhaps unsurprisingly I managed to piss off some of the higher-ups in the group (OPP et al.) so I thought I'd be best keeping away.
Cool, do you work in the field?
 

Jennywocky

guud languager
Joined
Sep 25, 2008
Messages
10,610
Location
Charn
#15
http://www.erictb.info/archetypes.html

Some interesting stuff in there if you skim the [pretty lengthy] page, about the Beebe types as applied to all the function slots and different MBTI types.

I agree with you about Se Trickster stuff, Architect. I always found it kind of weird that consciously I tend to be into elaborate, dry, witty humor and shades of nuance... but I've always had a large penchant for slapstick and overtly crass physical blundering. It's like a guilty pleasure for me. (The best is when it all mixes, like Wile E Coyote... you get blatant slapstick mixed with the mind projecting out and perceiving how the system will fail even before it's attempted...) Like, I don't just laugh, sometimes I totally lose it when watching such things.

Dario Nardi claims that the sixth function (Ni for the INTP, archtypically known as the "Good Parent") plays a specific role in the psyche as follows. In this video he brings up the example of the INTP and claims that those who integrate/develop Ni can have a vision and a purpose about the future, and can for example write a book or develop a theory that can have a large impact on society. However those INTP's who don't develop their Ni can, for example, dabble in ESP for fun, or won't have a clear vision of what they'll be doing in five years, or will jump from interest to interest (these are all his examples of immature Ni). Ultimately he believes that the INTP (in this Ni developed example) is still an INTP (compute ... compute ... compute), but with a well developed Ni there's a sense of energy and purpose 'diffused through the background', which is missing from the less developed Ni INTP.
I haven't watched it yet, but yeah, I guess the good parent will provide vision and direction... meanwhile, the weak/permissive parent will allow the flip side (Ne in this case, might expand out to Pe functions) to simply meander all over the place doing whatever it wishes without a real big-picture vision and goal. So you end up with a type of intellectual vagabond so dabbles in everything as the wanderlust permits, while no discipline is exerted to put on some boundaries and stay on task to reach a desired conclusion. If you can't envision your goal, how do you choose what versus what not to pursue with your time? You are at the mercy of the moment and whatever is currently looking appealing.

Hmm. But those qualities (of developing a vision of the future, dabbling with ESP for fun, having a clear 5+ year plan, etc) can easily develop in a TiNe, or any type, without the need for Ni to be considered.
I thought of that too as I was typing the earlier part of this post. Are there other ways an INTP can develop a goal/vision for life, and how would it look different from a supposed Ni parent function, if it does? My thought here is that Ni has its own vision, whereas Ti still is a machine that needs driven by what data is being fed into it (iow, it is still driven by something outside itself, and follows the rules that structure and bind it, whereas Ni generates its own truth).
 

QuickTwist

Soothsayer
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
6,452
Location
A hut in the woods
#16
Diminishing returns.
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,290
#17
I thought of that too as I was typing the earlier part of this post. Are there other ways an INTP can develop a goal/vision for life, and how would it look different from a supposed Ni parent function, if it does?
Yes.

And this is explained more properly with a different view of what the roles of the functions do.

Archetypal Roles of the Functions

Pe (child)

The Pe function, regardless of hierarchical placement, plays the role of the Puer Aeternus. It is responsible for giving a person's personality an element of playfulness, youth, and curiosity. And this quality can be directly deduced from the fundamental attributes of extroverted perception, which are:

* Insatiable impulse for new/novel information. Proactive (E) perception (P) is the active seeking-out of information not presently in your grasp. Whether this information is literal -- as in Se, who seeks stimulation -- or figurative as in Ne, who seeks funny or novel associations and imagery acrobatics, both are driven toward a type of new-ness. In culture at large, and in the individual, Pe is the function that is creative and productive in the artistic sense.

The music industry is saturated with Se-leads and the entertainment industry (say, animation) is saturated with Ne-leads. Pe is the regenerative, ever-young element within our culture that alters and changes the energy of our society.

James Hillman, one of the successors to Jung, put this eloquently in a quote found in this article related to the Puer http://pueretsenex.blogspot.com/ although he's not tying it to Pe.

Pi (parent)

In the same article, Hillman talks about the Senex, which is the archetypal equivalent of Pi. The qualities of the Senex are those of age, of what one roughly calls wisdom and the prudence brought upon by time but also by holding a long history of information behind you.

Again, these qualities emerge spontaneously from the Pi function by virtue of its configuration. Introverted (I) perception (P) does not seek-out for information, but goes within (I) for it, from what has been absorbed from the past or intuited to be the case overall about the world. In the heightened form of this function, Pi can be very closed-off, isolated in its perception and resistant to change. Indeed, Pi has an "old" quality to it that needs to constantly be offset by the spontaneous energy brought to it by the Pe function.

Without the Pe function, the Pi function will stagnate; having in its own libido no innate motion toward any part of the world (E). The Pi function, for all its wisdom would, if given the chance, be entirely content holding a perception of life composed entirely of the information already gathered. This naturally doesn't happen fully to anyone because few people are so one-sided, but that is ever the vector it seeks to follow.

And this is what heavy Pi types are often "parental" or giving advice, often seeming to be the "responsible" one for their age, or the knowledgeable one with an arsenal of facts.

~~~~~

Je & Ji

I haven't thought thoroughly enough about Ji and Je, but they also likewise embed into their hosts certain archetypal qualities. In brief, Je is more tied to the heroic journey, and Ji is tied to self-discovery.

The judgment functions, by virtue of their quality of delineation, are primarily what consciously participates in the creation of the ego. That is to say, delineation and the drawing-of-boundaries within ideas and concepts, extends to the self.

This is why FiSe's have such a keen and particular "sense of self". Self-discovery, and more broadly, self-questioning/investigation, is very much a quality brought up by Ji. The same applies to Ti, naturally, but the question is explored in more philosophical levels.

And Je, as what I term the articulator function, ties the ego toward the accomplishments made or not made in the world. It is a type of super-ego function, to borrow a Freudian term. Both Je and Ji are concerned with "the self" archetype; Je with what your external capacity and ability says about who you are, and Ji with what you believe and conceive as being a root and anchor in who you are.

~~~~~~

Given these categories, for a TiNe, for instance, Ne is always a "child" function and Si is always a "parent" function. Not the other way around, as Beebes would suggest. Growing into Si is synonymous with 'maturation' or 'adult-ing' for a TiNe. And growing into Ne is more akin to loosening-up and becoming more child-like.

Se is the other child function which they don't have, but they can appreciate it in others. It's really a TiNe's Ne that is laughing at Se's antics, and vice versa. Because these two children get along with each other. The same applies to the relationship the other functions have toward their missing siblings.
 

OmoInisa

Active Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
201
Location
London, UK
#18
Yes.

And this is explained more properly with a different view of what the roles of the functions do.

Archetypal Roles of the Functions

Pe (child)

The Pe function, regardless of hierarchical placement, plays the role of the Puer Aeternus. It is responsible for giving a person's personality an element of playfulness, youth, and curiosity. And this quality can be directly deduced from the fundamental attributes of extroverted perception, which are:

* Insatiable impulse for new/novel information. Proactive (E) perception (P) is the active seeking-out of information not presently in your grasp. Whether this information is literal -- as in Se, who seeks stimulation -- or figurative as in Ne, who seeks funny or novel associations and imagery acrobatics, both are driven toward a type of new-ness. In culture at large, and in the individual, Pe is the function that is creative and productive in the artistic sense.

The music industry is saturated with Se-leads and the entertainment industry (say, animation) is saturated with Ne-leads. Pe is the regenerative, ever-young element within our culture that alters and changes the energy of our society.

James Hillman, one of the successors to Jung, put this eloquently in a quote found in this article related to the Puer http://pueretsenex.blogspot.com/ although he's not tying it to Pe.

Pi (parent)

In the same article, Hillman talks about the Senex, which is the archetypal equivalent of Pi. The qualities of the Senex are those of age, of what one roughly calls wisdom and the prudence brought upon by time but also by holding a long history of information behind you.

Again, these qualities emerge spontaneously from the Pi function by virtue of its configuration. Introverted (I) perception (P) does not seek-out for information, but goes within (I) for it, from what has been absorbed from the past or intuited to be the case overall about the world. In the heightened form of this function, Pi can be very closed-off, isolated in its perception and resistant to change. Indeed, Pi has an "old" quality to it that needs to constantly be offset by the spontaneous energy brought to it by the Pe function.

Without the Pe function, the Pi function will stagnate; having in its own libido no innate motion toward any part of the world (E). The Pi function, for all its wisdom would, if given the chance, be entirely content holding a perception of life composed entirely of the information already gathered. This naturally doesn't happen fully to anyone because few people are so one-sided, but that is ever the vector it seeks to follow.

And this is what heavy Pi types are often "parental" or giving advice, often seeming to be the "responsible" one for their age, or the knowledgeable one with an arsenal of facts.

~~~~~

Je & Ji

I haven't thought thoroughly enough about Ji and Je, but they also likewise embed into their hosts certain archetypal qualities. In brief, Je is more tied to the heroic journey, and Ji is tied to self-discovery.

The judgment functions, by virtue of their quality of delineation, are primarily what consciously participates in the creation of the ego. That is to say, delineation and the drawing-of-boundaries within ideas and concepts, extends to the self.

This is why FiSe's have such a keen and particular "sense of self". Self-discovery, and more broadly, self-questioning/investigation, is very much a quality brought up by Ji. The same applies to Ti, naturally, but the question is explored in more philosophical levels.

And Je, as what I term the articulator function, ties the ego toward the accomplishments made or not made in the world. It is a type of super-ego function, to borrow a Freudian term. Both Je and Ji are concerned with "the self" archetype; Je with what your external capacity and ability says about who you are, and Ji with what you believe and conceive as being a root and anchor in who you are.

~~~~~~

Given these categories, for a TiNe, for instance, Ne is always a "child" function and Si is always a "parent" function. Not the other way around, as Beebes would suggest. Growing into Si is synonymous with 'maturation' or 'adult-ing' for a TiNe. And growing into Ne is more akin to loosening-up and becoming more child-like.

Se is the other child function which they don't have, but they can appreciate it in others. It's really a TiNe's Ne that is laughing at Se's antics, and vice versa. Because these two children get along with each other. The same applies to the relationship the other functions have toward their missing siblings.
Thank you Auburn. This is a heavyweight articulation of the nature of psychological disposition.

I remember when I first encountered Nardi's work. I was so excited about the promise of mapping the hitherto largely speculative concepts in analytical psychology onto 'hard' neuroscience.
Later I discovered that neuroscience was nowhere near as solid as I'd imagined and empiricism had its practical and philosophical limits in any event.

It also became obvious that the likes of Nardi and Beebe had a more fundamentally shallow conception of functions and disposition than I'd hoped for in so-called 'experts'.

In failing to truly grasp the fundamental essence of I vs E, J (rationality) vs P (irrationality), F vs T and S vs N, and the various interplays thereof, they're left with holes that they seek to fill with ever-expanding convolutions which result in circular reasoning.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#19
I remember when I first encountered Nardi's work. I was so excited about the promise of mapping the hitherto largely speculative concepts in analytical psychology onto 'hard' neuroscience.
Does it? Taking a stochastic approach as Dario does yields results with R better than random, what more do you want? Most of the world works this way. Taking an example of the midline theta oscillation (which the Japanese got really interested in for some reason), all the many studies I read (a lot - my work gives me access to all the scientific repos) shows they picked people at random. Mostly students generally, and got mostly random results (they did find some interesting bits).

Dario does a pre-selection and determines them according to psychological type (one paper did at least bin on extraversion/introversion), and finds that whole brain theta correlates to Ti. Now we have something.

If I was rich and had a foundation I'd get him set up with a proper budget. As it is I've just got my own professional grade EEG for personal research.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#20
I agree with you about Se Trickster stuff, Architect. I always found it kind of weird that consciously I tend to be into elaborate, dry, witty humor and shades of nuance... but I've always had a large penchant for slapstick and overtly crass physical blundering. It's like a guilty pleasure for me. (The best is when it all mixes, like Wile E Coyote... you get blatant slapstick mixed with the mind projecting out and perceiving how the system will fail even before it's attempted...) Like, I don't just laugh, sometimes I totally lose it when watching such things.
Yes! Bingo ... credit on that goes to Mary Jo (INFJ) who is a friend of Dario's. This trickster bit is what got me believing in the shadow functions, but the Ni part has me puzzled as I said. In his Google talk and elsewhere Dario says that yes you do see all the functions operating in all types, but to varying degrees more or less as predicated by the theory.

He also said that if he approached the EEG work just from a standpoint of MBTI and not from going back to the original Jung functional approach he wouldn't see this. Preferences (E,I, J, P, etc) are too blunt an instrument.

the good parent will provide vision and direction... meanwhile, the weak/permissive parent will allow the flip side (Ne in this case, might expand out to Pe functions) to simply meander all over the place doing whatever it wishes without a real big-picture vision and goal.
Yes good thoughts, Ne being extraverted goes outward, is a destructive force ('creative destruction" was an idea invented for Ne, to my mind) and is divergent. It's the main function in INTP's providing nilistic and aimless energy. Ni, it's opposite, would then reign that in.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#21
Yes.

And this is explained more properly with a different view of what the roles of the functions do.

Archetypal Roles of the Functions ...
Hillman, and Jung's probable best successor Von Franz (with the rest of the Valkyrie groupies) did run with this archtypical approach to personology. Unfortunately to my mind mainstream psychotherapy adopts those ideas more so than any MBTI variant. The problem is that an archtype approach like this is declarative/descriptive, not prescriptive as MBTI is.

For example, a psychotherapist will declare a client as having a Puer/Puella complex. OK, good to know, the first step in addressing a problem is knowing you have it. Now what? Basically it comes down to ... cut it out. Not too helpful. I've seen this approach with three different therapists and it just doesn't work (not me - I don't believe in modern psychotherapy, but a close friend). However, by viewing a clients functional stack, you can see how Puella behavior can arise. Addressing that does (at least in one example I know of) fix the problem.

Your novel archtype view above is interesting and possibly valuable, but it's a more abstract approach from the bare functions. I'll definitely study it deeper and think it through, but I'd note that we have enough trouble with functions, I'm not sure we're ready to go seriously into archtype (as a behavior model).
 

Rixus

I introverted think. Therefore, I am.
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
1,282
Location
United Kingdon
#22
I believe what he refers to is one take, albeit a poor one in my mind, of a concept I have been pondering greatly since my last visit here. The concept of the actualisation of the INTP. Allow me to pose a question - how many INTP's does it take to screw in a light bulb? It doesn't matter how many there are - they'll never get around to it. A severe exaggeration, perhaps, but a humorous illustration of our procrastinating nature.

To continue the metaphor; is the INTP in question somehow incapable of screwing in said light bulb? No. All reference materials concerning our type describes INTP's as incredibly intelligent individuals capable of solving any problem when given enough time. In that case, why does statistical evidence of our successes in life always appear so grim? I've read descriptions of our type listing us as having high rates of depression, substance abuse, the poorest job satisfaction and relative underachievement that does not fit actual aptitude. What is it that causes this?

I have been many times described as shy, lacking in confidence, lazy, and disorganised. As Yellow pointed out upthread, an INTP who can feign confidence and organisation would a devastating force indeed. Where then do we turn? Towards our adjacent cousin the INTJ, known for their intelligence, productivity and confidence (among other things). Perhaps to our extroverted counterparts, the ENTP? One can emulate said behaviour, but does that really alter ones cognitive processing? I don't believe that is the case.

Yellow also mentions this "shapeshifting", or type-shifting, which is the very thing I have been contemplating lately. I find it easier to emulate ENTP behaviour for short periods of time, much to the surprise of those around me who are accustomed to this usually timid individual who looks down at the floor a lot and occasionally stutters. And yet, this individual suddenly becomes highly confident and commanding, before retreating back into his shell once the task is complete. And afterwards, I usually require a day or so of no human contact to recharge (dependent upon the length of time and effort involved in said emulation).

Again I ask, does this mean a change of cognitive typology? No, it does not. It is simply drawing upon my more extroverted functions (in this case Ne). This is the answer I have come to - once you understand your functions, you can use them to accomplish great tasks. Of which, I have been far more productive of late. Perhaps this is more a placebo effect than a scientific methodology, but that is irrelevant. It works.
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,290
#23
Your novel archtype view above is interesting and possibly valuable, but it's a more abstract approach from the bare functions. I'll definitely study it deeper and think it through, but I'd note that we have enough trouble with functions, I'm not sure we're ready to go seriously into archtype (as a behavior model).
Indeed. I've historically had little desire to draw any sort of connection between the 8 functions and the Jungian archetypes. I still hold that same position today, generally speaking, so my above post was more a type of ...experiment... to evaluate things from Beebe's perspective (which does use Archetypes (and which is what this thread's about)) to see if it's accurate in its categorizations. For reference, here's Beebe's model of the 8 functions:

[bimgx=550]http://i.imgur.com/X3Cww5T.jpg[/bimgx]
So at this point I've had the opportunity to analyze hundreds of people, and whether they're an NiFe with playful Se, or an NeTi with rambunctious Ne, or an SiFe with their Ne, it's always the Pe function that plays the Puer/Puerlla (or "child") role in the psyche --- if we were to bother drawing a correlation at all. It motivates toward youthful renewal of experimentation; guiding the person into spontaneity. It's what entices an NiTe to try going out and having fun, it's what motivates the TiNe to want to be funny/silly. I can show you this visually too, with the highest concentration of eternally-child-like people being Pe-leads. Such as comedians, stand-ups, clowns, jokers/tricksters, etc. Here are a few samples:

Jim Carrey: NeTi ----------actor/comedian/standup
Robin Williams: NeFi------actor/comedian/standup
George Lopez: SeTi-------actor/comedian/standup
Dave Chappelle: NeTi-----comedian/standup
Kristen Schaal: NeFi--------comedian/actress
Jenna Marbles: NeFi-------comedian/vlogger
Chris Tucker: SeTi----------comedian/actor
Jonathan Ross: NeFi-------comedian/talk-show-host
Jack Black: SeTi-------------comedian/actor
Kate Micucci: NeFi----------actress in comedy
Tessa Violet: NeTi----------comedian/vlogger/actress/singer

Inversely, we see the Pi function, when pronounced in the individual (whether hierarchically or in development levels), lends to a "parental" quality; birthing the qualities of temperance, moderation, caution, knowledge/wisdom.

Jordan Peterson: NiFe---------professor at university
Ray Kurzweil: NiFe-------------scientist/inventor/futurist
Morgan Freeman: NiFe--------actor/narrator
Mitt Romney: SiTe--------------politician
Brian Williams: SiTe------------politician/news anchor
Scott Walker: SiTe--------------politician
Ken Jennings: SiTe-------------Jeopardy champion
Thomas Moore: SiFe-----------author
Paul Ekman: SiFe---------------author/researcher
 

Shieru

rational romantic
Joined
Feb 20, 2015
Messages
176
#24
i like the direction this thread is going!

the topic of archetypes is a difficult one to integrate into a typological system, not because it's irrelevant, i don't think, but because it only partially relates to the cognitive functions. from studying (and experiencing firsthand) analytical psychology, i've come to understand the archetypes as ways we tend to perceive our experience of life. and so, i think it's quite right to relate the puer to the Pe function, which is a large part of what manifests the spontaneous, creative energy within us. but it isn't the only factor in our psyche that contributes to 'puer' qualities; indeed, the puer is described as narcissistic and passive as well, which are traits more related to one's intrinsic energy and ego orientation.

descriptions of the archetypes tend to be vague, i think, because of the nature of their forms. they are symbolic representations the mind conjures from irrationally associated notions. and so the puer is a symbol of any trait in the psyche that seems 'childish'; impetuousness, optimism, high energy, selfishness, sexual/crude humor - all these things have the notion of 'immaturity' or 'youthfulness' tied to them, and so we relate them to the same symbol.

in the same way, we relate the anima to both feeling and intuition - things that tend to be thought of as 'feminine' traits, and the animus to thinking and logistics - things that tend to be thought of as 'masculine' traits. all these associations are irrational, that is they don't describe the objective truth. in reality we can't attribute all feeling to females and all logic to males, we all have both functions within us. but they reveal the way our psyches work, and these ideas can be utilized to describe and explore different parts of our characters.

Yellow also mentions this "shapeshifting", or type-shifting, which is the very thing I have been contemplating lately. I find it easier to emulate ENTP behaviour for short periods of time, much to the surprise of those around me who are accustomed to this usually timid individual who looks down at the floor a lot and occasionally stutters. And yet, this individual suddenly becomes highly confident and commanding, before retreating back into his shell once the task is complete. And afterwards, I usually require a day or so of no human contact to recharge (dependent upon the length of time and effort involved in said emulation).

Again I ask, does this mean a change of cognitive typology? No, it does not. It is simply drawing upon my more extroverted functions (in this case Ne). This is the answer I have come to - once you understand your functions, you can use them to accomplish great tasks. Of which, I have been far more productive of late. Perhaps this is more a placebo effect than a scientific methodology, but that is irrelevant. It works.
i agree with you, Rixus. i think that we are as much nurture (or really, practice and habit) as we are nature (our inherent function stack). the more one calls upon a function and practices using it in a certain way, the more capable they'll be of expressing the function/state of mind.

from what you say, i think i may have done something similar to what you're doing at one time. i utilized both Fe and Ne to operate like Te was my lead function. i can't do this anymore though, ended up blowing out my system and needing a looong time of recovery. i relate very much with what you say about needing a time of isolation after social expenditure. this seems like a natural and necessary compensation for introverts.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#25
i agree with you, Rixus. i think that we are as much nurture (or really, practice and habit) as we are nature (our inherent function stack). the more one calls upon a function and practices using it in a certain way, the more capable they'll be of expressing the function/state of mind
Yes, recently that's been proven to be virtually 50/50 (51%49% actually) in the largest study of its type of some few thousand identical twins, IIRC. So, two people with identical genetics, were only about 50% alike in life, by the many measures they used.

On the Archtypes - all of them (Jung, Kiersey, Beebe, Von Franz, etc) I take them as a kind of heuristic for a function, preference or prefrence grouping (e.g. NT). A little bit like cotton candy - looks good, tastes great but not a lot of calories there. Don't take them too seriously.
 

Rixus

I introverted think. Therefore, I am.
Joined
Nov 21, 2016
Messages
1,282
Location
United Kingdon
#26
Regarding Beebe's model of the 8 functions - it seems to me to be a very complex way of explaining the most rudimentary fact about all introverts and extroverts: that introverts gain energy through introversion, and expel energy from extroversion. Whereas our 4 primary functions come naturally to us, the shadow functions are those that expel the most energy for us to use - the exact opposites of our natural state. The concept being that a development of these functions would allow us to utilise them without excessive energy loss. This would seem like wisdom - much as exercising any ability over time.

But - anyone who has attempted this in the long run seems to inevitably crash from what appears like stress. I know that is what happens to me when I have attempted to countermand my introversion for long periods of time, much as Shieru also describes above. It's utterly exhausting and just doesn't work. I suppose this could, to use the exercise terminology, be like a muscle strain. The process of learning this requiring shorter bursts until this "muscle" is stronger. I just don't think I can see it that way, though. I can't relate to the concept of Ne at all, any more than Te or any opposite function for me. I can understand them, but they are so alien to me that I can't relate to them.

Moving into Architects point about nature verses nurture; this is an aspect that has also been churning in my head of late. I've been watching my children develop and ascertained that their typology seems to be defined from a young age. At only 5 years old, my youngest is described by her teachers with an almost text book definition of an ESFP. They comment on how she is the "polar opposite" of her elder sister. And since realising this, it has helped greatly with understanding her behaviour. The older sister and middle child, 7, is clearly an INFJ and my eldest, 11, is turning out to be an ENTP.

This in turn had me wondering something. I was much more extroverted as a younger child. But then something traumatic occurred followed by a very long period of pretty severe isolation, and I believe I let my introverted functions develop to be much stronger than my extroverted functions once were. I've come to the conclusion that I naturally displayed the potential for ENTP when young, and later transferred to INTP during early to mid teenage years. If this is a valid theory, then would I truly be INTP or a very unhealthy ENTP? Their cognitive functions are actually very similar.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#27
Regarding Beebe's model of the 8 functions - it seems to me to be a very complex way of explaining the most rudimentary fact about all introverts and extroverts: that introverts gain energy through introversion, and expel energy from extroversion.
I don't think it's that simple. We've had discussions here about Beebe's trickster function for the INTP - Se. It manifests in a crude, slapstick sense of humor and physical deviency (petty theft, etc). I've seen both behaviors in several INTP's which lends credence to the idea, and is a sophisticated view of the relationship of Se for INTP's.

So it's more than just energy required to 'use'. Once you get to the inferior and below the functions just tend to bb-shot burst out occasionally anyhow.

Whereas our 4 primary functions come naturally to us
Not the inferior, by definition!

But - anyone who has attempted this in the long run seems to inevitably crash from what appears like stress.
True enough

Moving into Architects point about nature verses nurture; this is an aspect that has also been churning in my head of late. I've been watching my children develop and ascertained that their typology seems to be defined from a young age.
Yup, they seem to be born with it.


This in turn had me wondering something. I was much more extroverted as a younger child.
Regardless of type most children behave extroverted. No wonder, it's a brand new world out there!
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,290
#28
Thank you OmoInisa; I'm glad it was helpful.

I've had a similar disenchantment experience, after absorbing as much as I could from the experts before realizing this is still very much a frontier. But frontiers are the most interesting places, no?

I don't think it's that simple. We've had discussions here about Beebe's trickster function for the INTP - Se. It manifests in a crude, slapstick sense of humor and physical deviency (petty theft, etc). I've seen both behaviors in several INTP's which lends credence to the idea, and is a sophisticated view of the relationship of Se for INTP's.
Agreeing with you for a moment, would it be ok to say this would still confine things to your synchronous experience to that of Se=trickster?

Would (or have you seen) Beebe's interpretation hold true for all the other 15 types and their 7th function? And even further, would the model hold true of all the 16 types in all their 16 function hierarchy positions (64 positions)?

Can we extrapolate the accuracy of the other 63 from this one? Couldn't it have been a lucky theoretical guess? Or an anecdotal coincidence among those you know?

And isn't it worth questioning the reasoning/framework from which these assumptions about 8-function placement arises? What's your opinion of the reasoning behind the 8 function model? Just very curious...
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#29
TAgreeing with you for a moment, would it be ok to say this would still confine things to your synchronous experience to that of Se=trickster?

Would (or have you seen) Beebe's interpretation hold true for all the other 15 types and their 7th function? And even further, would the model hold true of all the 16 types in all their 16 function hierarchy positions (64 positions)?
Sorry I didn't make this clear - that's where I'm at, I'm not taking this as canonical. Previously I had ignored the 8 function model as possible voodoo, the Se/INTP insight opened up that the 8 function model might have some legs. Which is why I posted this thread, trying to understand the sixth function. Jenny above has a good interpretation I think. I'm mostly confining myself to INTP's as that's my easiest starting point, separately I'm also looking at it for INFJ's.

Can we extrapolate the accuracy of the other 63 from this one? Couldn't it have been a lucky theoretical guess? Or an anecdotal coincidence among those you know?

And isn't it worth questioning the reasoning/framework from which these assumptions about 8-function placement arises? What's your opinion of the reasoning behind the 8 function model? Just very curious...
Didn't mean to imply we shouldn't question the 8 function model, in fact that's what I'm doing here!

I'm gathering evidence that the 8 function has legs. So far I've got Se/INTP, Ni/INTP (possibly), and am looking into the same two for INFJ as I said. This is from a behaviorist view.

Separately Dario has said that he sees the 8 functions operate in the brains of all types. If you accept his work at all it's reasonable to accept this too - he claims to be able to measure functions after all. So from an empirical view, taking his research as face value, it holds water too.

From a theory view, if you accept that the functions arise from information flow within the brain (in some fashion), it makes sense too. Given the somewhat 'monotonic' structure of the brain there's reason to suspect that it's possible that any type could handle any information or behavior, but that we have preferences.

Finally, logically it follows that to be A (Ti dominant) you can't be B (Te dominant), which lends credence to the idea of hierarchy. That is, in any non congruent decomposition you don't have overlap.

So, therefore, yes the 8 function model is looking good. If I can find examples of it in operation beyond Dario's work I'm done.
 

Auburn

Luftschloss Schöpfer
Joined
Sep 26, 2008
Messages
2,290
#30
Aha, gotcha.

Hmmm. Well I have some cool resources about the archetypes which I might share in a different thread. :) I'm thinking becoming familiar with analytical psychology could help in this inquiry.

(I'm pretty familiar with the Hero, Mother/Father, Child, Anima/us, Senex, Trickster, but the Damon eludes me.)
 

OmoInisa

Active Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
201
Location
London, UK
#31
Does it? Taking a stochastic approach as Dario does yields results with R better than random, what more do you want? Most of the world works this way.
I'm not suggesting that neuroscience in general or Nardi's research is worthless. Far from it. It is indeed intriguing to have some indication of there being some level physiological manifestation of psychological disposition.
The quest is worthy and the early results encouraging. And to his credit he doesn't make over-reaching claims for the implications of his results. His exploration is deliberate, effective and accessible.

However I do believe he may be looking for the wrong things, in the wrong way.
From what I've seen of his approach, he starts with a conception of the functions as discrete entities with exclusive attributes setting them apart from all other functions. He then sets out to discover evidence for them.
This is I think a common error that limits the degree of illumination that can be achieved.
There is no attribute that can be said to belong to an INTP's Ti exclusively for instance. Some attributes arise out if its T-ness, others out of its I-ness, others out of its J-ness and others out of its stack dominance.

The arrangement of Jung's description of the types in chapter 10 of Psychological Types was more than simply a way of organising his thesis for better readability.
It was fundamental to the very nature of the functions.
He starts off by exploring I in general vs E in general, and indeed everything is examined under this greater umbrella. T, F, S and N are explored primarily in the context of their introversion or extrovertion.
Rationality and irrationality are also explored, and attitudinally of course. And so on In doing this, each function is related, compared and contrasted with other functions along their axes of commonality or difference.

The point here is that the functions exist as a family. Each family member has certain points of similarity and certain points of difference with other members of the family. Thinking about individual members of the family as atomised entities to be analysed separately from the others, while not being totally useless, is rather limiting.
Ti is kin with Te - some things commonly said about Ti or Te in particular could be more accurately said about T in general. Fe is kin with Ne - some things should be said about extroversion in general rather than about Fe or Ne in particular. And so on.

When one thinks in this way, it becomes clear why exotic innovations like the 8-function model are redundant and circular. As Auburn has so well said, There is no need to conjure up some enigmatic Se trickster since the observed phenomena are recognisable from the standpoint of a properly understood Ne.

Truly, the dominant function pair is sufficient to describe a personality. The inferior pair can be derived from it when necessary, for an examination of the individual's less basic and self-evident tendencies.
But the dominant pair covers the individual's modus operandi.
 

Artsu Tharaz

Resident Resident
Joined
Dec 12, 2010
Messages
2,657
#32
Auburn said:
Se is the other child function which they don't have, but they can appreciate it in others. It's really a TiNe's Ne that is laughing at Se's antics, and vice versa. Because these two children get along with each other. The same applies to the relationship the other functions have toward their missing siblings.
So, does this mean that Js get on better with other Js and Ps get on better with other Ps?
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#33
Hmmm. Well I have some cool resources about the archetypes which I might share in a different thread. :) I'm thinking becoming familiar with analytical psychology could help in this inquiry.
In my experience the archetypes as the kernel of the complexes are useful. Jung's idea was that the first thing you encounter when diving into the unconscious are complexes (he discovered this with his word association work). In neuroscience terms we'd say that they were patterns impressed on us during childhood (mostly - sometimes later trauma would cause complexes). This is a useful idea in depth psychotheraphy but has to be distinguished from Beebes/etc archetypes. The complexes are neocortex patterns we picked up that can be unlearned. The root of the functions cannot be turned off this way. In fact how we respond to our functions can be complexes themselves, either good or bad.

As I indicated above the missing piece is modern depth psychotherapy is the Type work. A deep understanding of the functions can help a therapist distinguish between a complex and the natural expression of a function, or a conflict between the two (Type suppression).
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#34
However I do believe he may be looking for the wrong things, in the wrong way. From what I've seen of his approach, he starts with a conception of the functions as discrete entities with exclusive attributes setting them apart from all other functions. He then sets out to discover evidence for them.This is I think a common error that limits the degree of illumination that can be achieved. There is no attribute that can be said to belong to an INTP's Ti exclusively for instance. Some attributes arise out if its T-ness, others out of its I-ness, others out of its J-ness and others out of its stack dominance.
However that approach doesn't work here. For example, why is Ti for an INTP so different from a Ti for an ISTP? Same function, same place in the stack, however it expresses very differently. My brother is an ISTP as are many of my coworkers so I can provide specific examples if you wish.

This long puzzled me until I found that Dario's research discovered that the INTP and ISTP actually use quite different regions. The INTP using F3 and F4 predominantly for Ti, and ISTP's P3 and P4. The latter are physical/kinestitic regions, for example P3 being the part that is good at identifying objects. Now that's significant! We find that ISTP's use a part of the brain that figures out the external world, while INTP's leave that mostly alone which makes perfect sense given the two types. Are those regions both T, and I? Yes, generally, but now it gets vague because other types use those too for other purposes.

So I don't agree the functions are redundant and circular, and in fact Dario has said that when he tried to use the bare preferences he wasn't able to find the brain correlations, because they're too general. The preferences are generalizations with the functions being specializations, and conflating the two is a fallacy of generalization in my view. Naturally the preferences are useful, as they give you a different angle into things and a rough idea, but it's harder to draw conclusions (if not impossible as I showed above) from them alone. You weren't making an appeal to authority, but I believe Jung needed the preferences as a way to discover the functions, but that doesn't mean they're canonical (e.g. over time research gets better).
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,692
#36
Dario Nardi said:
Truly, brain activity varies by type, and the clearest patterns match the original impulse for type theory: Jung’s framework of eight mental functions.
If you accept Dario's work as valid it's the most empirical demonstration of the functions as the primary elements. Add that elsewhere has stated that he sees the eight functions operating in all of our brains (to varying degrees) and you must concludes Beebe's model (or variant) as canonical.
 

Pizzabeak

*Guardians of the Galaxy*
Joined
Jan 24, 2012
Messages
1,718
#37
Is it that starting with the fifth function it becomes the opposite type (ENTJ, Te-Ni instead of Ti-Ne) or that it follows from Fe to Te, Si or Ne to Ni, Si to Se; etc. This just shows how the types a connected. It becomes the opposite. Ni is just Ti+Ne at work on a problem, it isn't actually "Ni" for the sixth function. So the eighth Fi function is because the first Ti function but inverted, or is it inverted from the fourth Fe.
 

Late2theParty

Active Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2011
Messages
104
Location
Penis Gun Freaky Land
#38
This theory that Ni sort of rounding an INTP stack.... has been making some sense for me at lately at least. One thing I noticed about strong Ni users is that they have an ability to gain an intuitive understanding of something without spending a lot of time doing rote repetition. Some can't really explain it conceptually, but they can like "do" things or kind of know what steps to take next given an ambiguous situation. They also seem to have a certain confidence they are going in the right direction, or have made the right choice even if they can't see why quite yet.

I always kinda struggled with this. I could understand things conceptually easily, theories concepts and frameworks. But I struggled with the application of the concepts. I would often get stuck and nothing would pop into my head and I would get frustrated and give up. I'd never be sure what direction to go and Ne would lead me down a million alternate scenarios. Rarely would I have eureka moments or feel confident in what I was doing.

Through martial arts I learned to embrace the rote repetition , in order to get the intuition. I realized this was missing from a lot of my hobbies. I started to go back and do lots of boring repetition that I always avoided, and then after a while... I start to get intuition about what to do next, and how to get out of sticky situations that caused me to get stuck and had too many variables for the purely rational / conscious part of the brain to suss out.

I think it has a calming effect as well, because if intuition can handle it and is pretty sure about it.. it makes you feel much more at ease.

I remember too Architect saying something like, he feels more in flow when he can tackle a programming problem that builds off what he already has some experience with. If he has to learn something completely totally new... he won't get into flow until it's "digested" and become a part of his Si database.

I too relate to this, and I feel much more at ease the more intuitive things become and I achieve proficiency and mastery.

So in general, I could see that Ni could play a satisfying role for maturing an INTP. And I wonder if more successful INTP's have more Ni to start off with in general. They wouldn't get stuck as easily and be able to find a direction to head in quickly.

I feel like I started out with very very little of it, and it has taken and is taking me a lot of repetition to get more of it... which I've been extremely averse to doing. I can only imagine other INTP's are similarly struggling integrating it if they are low as well.
 
Top Bottom