Evolving the eight- model

8 archetypes guide how the function-attitudes are expressed in an individual psyche

Historical background: sensation and introverted (‘intro- Jung’s eight functions verted irrational types’). These were the eight functions in Jung’s original descrip- tion. It was C G Jung, of course, who introduced the language we use today: words such as These functions were nothing less than function and attitude, as well as his highly capacities for consciousness residing with- specific names for the four functions of in any individual—though of course most our conscious orientation (thinking, feeling, people do not differentiate all these cap- sensation, intuition), and the two attitudes acities for their own use. It was Jung who through which those orientations are de- taught us that most people pair a rational ployed (introversion and extraversion). function with an irrational one to develop a conscious orientation, or, as he put it, an Establishing the rationale for this language ego-consciousness, that for most people as a helpful basis for the analysis of con- involves just these two differentiated

sciousness was the purpose of his 1921 functions. John Beebe book, . Toward the end of that book he combined function Despite Isabel Briggs Myers’s later read- types and attitude types to describe, in ing of a single sentence in Jung’s long and often contradictory book (Myers & Myers There’s much talk in the type turn, eight function-attitudes. Regrettably it wasn’t until Dick Thompson published 1980:19; Jung 1921/1971:406, para 668), world nowadays about the his 1996 book Jung’s Function-Attitudes he never made clear that the attitude type Eight-Function or Whole Explained that we had that term for them, of the two functions in this two-function Type Model, and my name so most Jungians have simply referred to model of consciousness would alternate is sometimes brought up as them as eight ‘functions’. between function # 1 and function #2. a pioneer in this area. Nevertheless, for Jung the attitude type was Jung did, however, open the door to the the primary thing, and the function type a possibility of a further differentiation of I appreciate this opportunity to kind of sub-something that expressed that functions, up to a limiting number of four: establish the historical con- attitude in a particular way. Accordingly, the fourth to differentiate being his famous text of what I’ve contributed, he organised his general description of the ‘inferior’ function, which remains too close and explain in my own words types in terms of the attitudes, describing to the unconscious, and thus a source of errors and complexes. what my innovations are. first ‘the peculiarities of the basic psycho- logical functions in the extraverted attitude’ Jung said relatively little about the third and then going on to ‘the peculiarities of function. He expected that both functions the basic psychological functions in the #3 and #4 would, in most people, remain John Beebe MD (ENTP), a Jungian introverted attitude.’ analyst, lectures on psychological potentials only, residing in the unconscious, types in many parts of the world. His Jung started with extraverted thinking and represented in dreams in archaic ways and writings on type have appeared in extraverted feeling (which he called ‘the relatively refractory to development except the Chiron Clinical Series, Journal extraverted rational types’) and extraverted under exceptional circumstances—such as of , Psych- sensation and extraverted intuition (‘the the process Jung sometimes ological Perspectives, and several extraverted irrational types’), before turn- witnessed in the analysis of a relatively books, including his pioneering 1992 ing to the introverted types: introverted mature person in the second half of life, study, Integrity in Depth. thinking and introverted feeling (‘intro- when the archaic functions would press [email protected] verted rational types’), and introverted for integration into consciousness.

Australian Psychological Type Review Vol 8 No. 1 March 2006 39

John Beebe: Evolving the 8-

Anima / Animus: type Chinese laundress, and it was she who Bridge to the Unconscious could provide me a bridge to the practical- ities of life that my conscious standpoint, ever theoretical, tended to leave out. I think When Jung’s close associate Marie Louise it was also she who made me consider von Franz published her Zurich seminar sorting out the rest of my consciousness. on the inferior function, in Lectures in Which archetypes were associated with Jung’s Typology, I was already a candid- my other functions? ate in analytic training at the C G Jung Institute of San Francisco. Her discussion I began to watch my dreams. Gradually it of the possibilities for development in this became obvious that when they symbolised largely unconscious area of the mind was my extraverted intuition, it was in a heroic, thrilling to read, and it opened up the four- rather grandiose way. (In a dream, I once function model for a whole generation of saw President Lyndon Johnson, architect analysts. of the Great Society in my country, as an image of my dominant extraverted intuition, Von Franz made it clear that we have a which gave it a high-handed, crafty cast, a choice about developing function #3, but bit out of touch with the actual readiness that the integration of function #4, the of those around me for the changes that I inferior function, is very much under the wanted to introduce in their lives, in the control of the unconscious, which limits name of helping them progress.) what we can do with it. Nevertheless, this much of the unconscious belongs in a sense My introverted thinking was symbolised to the ego—and even provides the bridge by a Father in one dream that found him to the Self that the other differentiated in conflict with an upset feeling-type son, functions can not. whom I eventually recognised as an image of my third function. The particular son The functions are carried I became aware that the inferior function figure in the dream was a persistently im- was often thought by Jungian analysts to mature man in analysis at the time, whose into consciousness on the operate in this way because it is ‘carried’ oscillation of woundedness and creativity by the Anima or Animus, archetypes of fit well the description Marie Louise von backs of the archetypes soul that can serve as tutelary figures, rep- Franz had given in her classic study of the resenting the otherness of the unconscious ‘problem of the ’ (1970), the psyche, and also its capacity to speak to us Latin term referring to an eternal boyhood to enlarge our conscious perspectives (Jung befitting an immortal. I decided that this 1921/1971: 467-472) (note 1). The Anima dream was referring to an aspect of my and Animus are like fairy bridges to the own feeling that was inflated, vulnerable unconscious, allowing, almost magically, and chronically immature. a relationship to develop between the two parts of the mind, conscious and uncon- In this way, I began to evolve my under- Note 1 scious, with the potential to replace this standing that the four functions are brought I have adopted Jung’s use of Latin when tension of opposites with the harmony of into consciousness through the dynamic speaking of the Anima and Animus (literally, wholeness. And it is through the undiffer- energy of particular archetypes: ‘soul’ and ‘spirit’) because that language allows for gender (the Anima often being a entiated, incorrigible inferior function that • Hero for the superior function they do their best work! feminine figure in a man, and the Animus a • Father for the second or ‘auxiliary’ masculine one in a woman), and because function it conveys the archaic quality of these deep Basic orientation: Hero/Heroine, structures of the mind that Jung uncovered • Puer for the tertiary function in his explorations of the unconscious. Father/Mother, Puer/Puella • Anima for the inferior function Jung called them archetypes of the collect- ive unconscious, but when carrying function By then I thought I knew my own type— My functions were carried into conscious- #4, the inferior function, I feel they also form part of the conscious mind’s functioning. extraverted intuition, with introverted think- ness on the backs of those archetypes! A Hence I regard them as ego-syntonic— ing as my second function—and I had taken great deal of their functioning, even after compatible with the ego and its preferred the MBTI questionnaire, which scored me they became conscious—that is, available function-attitude—even though carrying ENTP, in apparent confirmation of my self- to me as ways of perceiving and assessing values from the that compensate the attitude of the person’s diagnosis. It was in dreams that I met my reality—continued to reflect the character- superior function. Anima as a humble, introverted-sensation istic behaviour of these archetypes.

40 Australian Psychological Type Review Vol 8 No. 1 March 2006

Later, I found evidence in the dreams of Four functions were still only half the story women for a Heroine, a Mother, and a of how consciousness arranges itself. Jung Puella Aeterna (eternal girl), symbolising said in Psychological Types that if one takes the first three functions of consciousness into account the all-important attitudes, in a highly analogous arrangement to the extraversion and introversion, we have to way my own were symbolised. I could realise that there are in all eight functions, also verify from their dreams what other or, as we say now, function-attitudes. Jungian analysts had already established, Von Franz had postulated that the greatest that the Animus carries the inferior funct- difficulties that occur between people are ion for a woman—although I came to re- on the basis of one using a function with a serve that term for a spirit or soul figure particular attitude (e.g., extraversion), and operating as a bridge to the unconscious, the other using the same function with the and not simply to refer to an antagonistic opposite attitude (e.g., introversion). I de- or argumentative side of the woman, as cided to apply that idea to the situation some were doing in accord with the more within a single psyche, in which the an- normal English language use of the word tagonism was not between two people, animus, which does not include its Jungian, but between two functions with opposite spiritual meaning (, 1957). attitudes, seeking to express themselves I went public with these ideas for the first within the same person. time in 1983, at a conference for Jungian The result, I realised, was almost always a analysts and candidates at Ghost Ranch in repression of one member of such a pair Abiquiu, New Mexico. There I offered the of functions, as a consequence of the con- first archetypal model for the various pos- scious preference for the attitude through itions of consciousness that heretofore had which the other member of the pair was been called ‘superior’, ‘auxiliary’, ‘tertiary’ expressing that function. In my own case, and ‘inferior’ functions. I suggested that I had figured out that my tertiary function Four functions are only these should be thought of, respectively, as was not only feeling, but extraverted feel- the Heroic function, the Father or Mother ing, and that my inferior function was in- half the story of how con- function, the Puer or Puella function, and troverted sensation. Where were my intro- the Anima or Animus function, in accord verted feeling and extraverted sensation? sciousness arranges itself with the nature of the archetype that had Obviously, deep in the unconscious, kept taken up residence in each of these four there because they were in attitude basic locations of potential consciousness. to the function-attitudes that I had differ- Wow! Behind each typological position in entiated. the unfolding of conscious, an archetype Even more in shadow were the functions was involved, guiding us to be heroic, par- opposite in attitude to my first two funct- ental, and even puerile and contrasexual, as ions—that is, the introverted intuition that part of what makes us capable of becom- my superior extraverted intuition tended ing cognisant of ourselves and the world to inhibit, and the extraverted thinking that around us. my auxiliary introverted thinking looked down upon. The Shadow Personality: Opposing Personality, These four functions—introverted intuit- ion, extraverted thinking, introverted feel- Senex/Witch, , ing, extraverted sensation—continued to Demonic Personality express themselves, however, in shadowy ways. What, then, were the archetypes that At the time I was too dazzled by the seem- carried these repressed shadow functions? ing completeness of the four-function model Answering this question led me to take up to see that even more delineation was need- the problem of the types in shadow, which ed to make sense of what Jung had said has preoccupied me ever since. Work in this we could find in ourselves, if his vision of area has to be tentative, because we never a wholeness to consciousness could be re- fully see our own shadow, but in my case alised. I began to identify typical, shadowy ways

Australian Psychological Type Review Vol 8 No. 1 March 2006 41

John Beebe: Evolving the 8-function model

in which I would use the four functions that The four archetypes of shadow—Opposing lie in the shadow of my more differentiated Personality, Senex/Witch, Trickster, and quartet of individuated function-attitudes. Demonic Personality—and the function- My introverted intuition, shadow in atti- attitudes they carried for me—introverted tude to my superior extraverted intuition, intuition, extraverted thinking, introverted has decidedly oppositional traits: it ex- feeling, extraverted sensation—were all presses itself in ways I could variously what a psychologist would call ego-dys- describe as avoidant, passive-aggressive, tonic. That is, they were incompatible with paranoid and seductive, in all cases taking my conscious ego or sense of ‘I-ness’— up a stance that is anathema to the way my what I normally own as part of ‘me’ and superior extraverted intuition wants me to ‘my’ values. Nevertheless, they were part behave. I decided to call the archetype of my total functioning as a person, uncom- carrying this bag of oppositional behav- fortable as it made me to recognise the fact. iours the Opposing Personality. In this way, using myself as an example, Similarly, my fatherly introverted thinking, and my years of Jungian analysis as a a patient teacher of ideas, was laboratory, I eventually came to identify shadowed by a dogmatic, donnish extra- eight discrete archetypes guiding the way verted thinking that didn’t listen, or even the eight function-attitudes are expressed care about others’ ideas. I decided to call within a single, individual psyche (Beebe this rather pompous, unrelated figure my 2004). Senex, using ’s (1967/1979) Although, for convenience of reference, choice of name for an archetype that is and out of respect for the traditional num- coldly, arrogantly, judgmental, in an old- bering of the functions, I am in the habit man-pulling-rank sort of way. (The Latin of assigning numbers to the function- word senex, root of our word ‘senator’, I no longer view the type attitude ‘positions’ associated with these means ‘old man’.) archetypes, I no longer view the type pro- profile as a rigid Gradually I realised that women I knew had file of an individual as expressing a rigid a similar archetype carrying the shadow hierarchy of differentiation of the various of differentiation of the of their normally motherly auxiliary funct- functions of consciousness. ion, and that this archetype displays many Rather, I have come to regard the positions functions of the ‘negative mother’ characteristics I the types of function-attitude seem to occ- had learned to associate with the Witch upy, when we construct a model of them figure in European fairytales (von Franz in our minds, in a much more qualitative 1972). light. It is as if they form an interacting cast The shadow side of my eager-to-please but of characters through which the different oh-so-vulnerable-to-the-feelings-of-others functions may express themselves in the internal boy was the Trickster, which in ongoing drama of self and shadow that is me, with its confident introverted feeling, anyone’s lived psychological life. could reverse any expectation—to double- Although the actual casting of specific bind anybody who tries to ride herd on the function-attitudes in the various roles will child. (As a little boy, to taunt my mother be governed by the individual’s type, the Note 2. when she expected perfection of me, I roles themselves seem to be found in every- actually used to draw the two-faced god In choosing the name Trickster for this side one’s psyche. Hence I regard them as arche- Mercurius, although I did not yet know of my shadow, I drew upon Jung’s classic typal complexes carrying the different fun- delineations of the Trickster archetype his mythological identity) (note 2). (Jung 1948/1967; Jung 1954/1959). ctions, and I like to speak of them as typical Finally, I began to see my extraverted sen- subpersonalities found in all of us. Note 3. sation, the shadow side of my Anima intro- As with the Opposing Personality, the term verted sensation, as a Demonic Personality I have spent many years verifying this Demonic Personality is my own creation. In that often operates as an undermining oaf, scheme. Through observation of clients developing my model I deliberately left these terms large and vague to convey the vast a beastly part of myself that nevertheless and others whose types and complexes I stretches of personality territory involved in can occasionally be an uncanny source for have gotten to know well, and through the these dark and largely unexplored areas of the infusion of redemptive spirit into my analysis of films by master filmmakers in myself where my shadow typology expresses dealings with myself and others (note 3). itself as character pathology. which archetypes and function-attitudes

42 Australian Psychological Type Review Vol 8 No. 1 March 2006

are clearly delineated, I have concluded More importantly, the model allows me to References that the relationships between these arche- see what position that function-attitude in- types and the scheme of differentiation habits, and thereby I am pointed to watch John Beebe 2004, ‘Understanding consci- that results for the function-attitudes is not for the archetypal ways in which, as a con- ousness through the theory of psych- merely personal to me, but is actually uni- sequence of being in that position, that par- ological types’, in J Cambray & L Carter, Analytical Psychology, Hove and New versal. ticular consciousness expresses itself. York: Brunner Routledge, pp 83-115. The archetypal roles within this scheme I am grateful that this model is leading Margaret T Hartzler, Robert W McAlpine, are shown in 1. An example of present-day type assessors to take a sec- and Leona Haas 2005, Introduction to how the model distributes consciousness ond look at C G Jung’s foundational eight- type and the 8 Jungian functions, Mountain View, CA: CPP. in an ENFJ is provided in Diagram 2. function description of the types. James Hillman 1979 (1967), ‘Senex and Puer’, in J Hillman (editor), Puer papers, Dallas, TX: Spring, pp 3-53. DIAGRAM 1: Archetypal complexes carrying the eight functions of consciousness C G Jung 1971 (1921), Psychological types (The collected works of C G Jung, Hero / Heroine Opposing Personality volume 6), London: Routledge. #1 (superior or dominant #5 (same function as #1 function) but with opposite attitude) C G Jung 1959 (1954), ‘On the psychology of the Trickster figure’, in The arche- types of the (The collected works of C G Jung, Father / Mother Puer / Puella Senex / Witch Trickster volume 9), London: Routledge, pp #2 (auxiliary function) #3 (tertiary function) #6 (same function as #2 #7 (same function as #3 255-272. but with opposite attitude) but with opposite attitude) C G Jung 1967 (1948), ‘The spirit mercurius’, in (The collected Anima / Animus Demonic Personality works of C G Jung, volume 13), London: Routledge, pp 191-250. #4 (inferior function) #8 (same function as #4 but with opposite attitude) Emma Jung 1957, ‘On the nature of the Animus’, in Animus and Anima, New York: Spring. Isabel Briggs Myers, with Peter Myers 1995 (1980), Gifts differing: Understanding DIAGRAM 2: ENFJ as an illustration of Dr John Beebe’s arrangement of . Palo Alto, CA: the archetypal complexes carrying the eight functions of consciousness Davies-Black. Henry L Thompson 1996, Jung’s function- attitudes explained, Watkinsville, GA: Extraverted feeling Introverted feeling Wormhole. Hero / Heroine Opposing personality #1 (superior function) #5 (shadow of Hero/Heroine) Marie-Louise von Franz 1970, The problem of the Puer Aeternus, New York: Spring. Marie-Louise von Franz 1971, ‘The inferior Introverted intuition Extraverted sensing Extraverted intuition Introverted sensing function’, in M L von Franz and James Father / Mother Puer / Puella Senex / Witch Trickster Hillman, Lectures in Jung’s typology, #2 (auxiliary function) #3 (tertiary function) #6 (shadow of Father/Mother) #7 (shadow of Puer/Puella) Zurich: Spring. Marie-Louise von Franz 1972, Problems of Introverted thinking Extraverted thinking the Feminine in fairytales, New York: Anima / Animus Demonic Personality Spring. #4 (inferior function) #8 (shadow of Anima/Animus)

This article was first published in TypeFace 16:2 (Summer 2005), This model of the archetypal complexes My hope is that their increasing comfort and is reprinted here, in a slightly that carry the eight functions of conscious- with a total eight-function, rather than a different form, by permission of ness is my present instrument for the ex- preferred four-function, model will enable John Beebe and the British APT. ploration of type in myself and others. It them to begin to recognise the extraordin- enables me to see, in just about any inter- ary role possibilities that emerge, both for Text and © 2005 action, what consciousness (that is, which good and for ill, as these consciousnesses function-attitude) I am using at that given differentiate themselves in the course of John Beebe MD, 337 Spruce St, time. personal development. ™ San Francisco, CA 94118, USA [email protected]

Australian Psychological Type Review Vol 8 No. 1 March 2006 43