[INFJ] - Irregular/well-developed shadow functions? | INFJ Forum

[INFJ] Irregular/well-developed shadow functions?

P

Proverb

Newbie
Feb 24, 2015
41
3
0
MBTI
xxxx
Hello World,

I have a question regarding the development of shadow functions and their influence on feeling like one type or another other. I've recently taken a cognitive functions test, and was shown that my top two functions are Ni and Fi. Coming in at support tend to be three "good" ones while the rest are either average or limited in their use (Se and Ne tend to be my weakest). What problems aside from feeling mistyped or without a type might a well-developed shadow function cause?

While I'll like to say that I'm an INFJ, I can't be too sure. I guess this post is also one in which I'll like to be "tested" to see if I'm really an INFJ.
 
Getting both high Ni and Fi scores could indicate a Ni-Fi or Fi-Ni loop (Ni-Te-Fi-Se, and Fi-Se-Ni-Te), but there might be simpler explanations. The tests are just as accurate as your answers, given that the tests are accurate. If there is no clear MBTI to read out of it, try to look at it more holistically.

Either way, it is easy to get tangled and it might not serve very useful to delve into. Go with what you think is right, and if you feel you can relate then great. But maybe that is just me.

edit:
welcome to the forum!
 
Thank you for your response,

But could you could more in depth with "loops"? At least according to your knowledge of them. I'd appreciate it greatly!
 
A tertiary loop is when an individual has a weaker secondary function, either undeveloped or otherwise stunted. Basically the two strongest functions become the dominant and tertiary. It is often considered being an unhealthy state of mind to be in one.

I don't want to paint too much of a picture though, as I really don't know much about it. It is called tertiary loops, if you want to read into it.
 
I actually just started reading into it. Funny enough, the Ni-Fi loop is usually a problem for INTJs, which worries me haha Supposedly, I simply need to exercise my extraverted feeling, and all will be well.
 
[MENTION=13301]Realeros[/MENTION]: I would say to you the best thing you can do is note down some of the history to the MBTI theory.

It turns out that the shadow functions theory is the work of a Jungian analyst named John Beebe. It in many ways diverges from the founding father Carl jung's major principles of typology.

The out of pattern scores you see are because, strictly interpreted by the definitions, anyone can end up with almost any function-attitudes.

Ni-Fi is entirely plausible as a dominant introverted intuitive with auxiliary feeling in Carl Jung's system. It is not OK as an interpretation in the standard model employed by most MBTI practitioners, however, which originated with a man named Harold Grant, and was taken on by Beebe, but which not all traditional Jungian schools adopt.

My advice is go with whatever model works best for you, and understand it deeply, but attempt to see the merits of other models too.

On a less precise philosophical level, and more empirical level, you should note that the MBTI testing instrument is validated by serious statistical analysis to ensure there is something real at work. It does not correspond to these models, which relate to that empirical research in a more indirect conceptual level. If you want the most robust sorter on an empirical level, look into the MBTI instrument and its dichotomies, not the functions, or better yet, consider the Five Factor Model, which is more respected in academic psychology.

I would use the models for their ideas, not their strict empirical sorting capacity (where I'd trust statistical analysis over intuitive hearsay to determine what is the right way to sort people).
 
Thank you for your advice. I've been doing my research, and have come to discover the Ni-Fi/Fi-Ni loop happens in only two personalities: ISFPs and INTJs. Could I not be an INFJ?
 
[MENTION=13301]Realeros[/MENTION]: those theories where Ni-Fi only occurs in INTJ and ISFP mostly do not make sense. I would advise against taking them too seriously; if you really wish to use them, then aim for a "best-fit" but if you want a more exact fit, realize that the history speaks against taking such models too rigidly at face value.
It's entirely possible to have had your top two Ni+Fi by the work of Jung in an intuitive feeler, and that goes to show you that the rules people make have started to become arbitrary.

The basic difference in the modern models is the second function is assumed in the opposite attitude of the dominant. That does NOT have to be true in the versions of the theory that are well acknowledged outside the most popular ones in the MBTI community (and Isabel Myers, who initiated this trend, acknowledged that there was not a whole lot of support for her view).

Again, this is not saying go with Jung and ignore Myers; instead, just realize that they all had their own pet theories, and they all have their merits and flaws. Go with what describes you well, and ignore people who don't accept these possibilities is my advice, because there's no rational reason to not accept them. It's safe to say that when the inventor of functions theory, Jung himself, thought Ni+Fi is possible, you don't need to exclude it as a possibility just because it's not the standard doctrine among certain other circles.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back