I wanted to ask is it possible to have a mental image, emotion or experience of a cognitive function you don't have in your stack. I remember I once had a very vivid image in my mind while I was shaving where my my face fell off and I was faceless. It is something I fear on a subconscious level, and I have been plagued by nightmares of faceless beings haunting me in my sleep, when I was 16 I had this nightmare. It was so terrifying I cried for half an hour. It just seems so similar to the Myth of Ti. So I was wondering, is it a shadow function perhaps?
I wanted to ask is it possible to have a mental image, emotion or experience of a cognitive function you don’t have in your stack.
In the most technical sense, no. Assuming the necessity for a 4-function model is a coherent explanation of the data, the "experience of Ti", as part of phenomenology, is only available to Ti-Fe users. But this doesn't say anything about images of faceless beings, or any specific behaviors. Behaviors and even symbolic images are examples of personal 'content', and any type of content is available to every person. There isn't a thought or an image that necessitates the possession of a certain function, to have it. The example behaviors and images in the mythology articles are instrumental to approximating the general effects of functions, but there's no 1:1 connection between function and content.
So I was wondering, is it a shadow function perhaps?
There's an acknowledgement of the unconscious in the CT model, but there are no shadow functions -- unless we consider our unconscious functions as shadow functions. But CT isn't an 8 function model, so the model isn't in line with Beebes, etc.
However, recently there has been an elaboration of this topic via compound functions. For a Gamma type like yourself, there is an experience of IT that happens, as a result of Fi-Te cycling together. But it never reproduces the identical psychological experience of "Ti" (L-) in the L types. So "IT" is not Ti, but it covers the same attributes.
Alright I see thank you for that explanation. Yes I think I tend to conflate personal content with cognitive functions too much. I've tried in vain to associate zodiac signs and the four temperaments with the CT model. Even if I arrive at an approximate conclusion it still doesn't mean I'm 100% correct because each system has variations.
Perhaps because I have developed Te it may have an IT effect. But now that I've read your description of compound functions, I've realized its actually completely separate from the vision I saw of the faceless being. The faceless theme is more to do with loss of identity and low self-esteem for me. So now I see it isn't necessarily tied to logical thinking, even if it resembles the myth of Ti.