Transcendent function and socionics

[Angel von Himmel]

I am not sure if many people here are familiar with Jung's concept of the transcendent function, but technically it is considered to be a fifth function that is sort of at a midway point between all of the functions. I suppose if I were to use some of Tchaulldig's [am I spelling this right?] terminology it is technically the function that an XXXX would use as opposed to the other functions. Now, this sort of makes me wonder here about some things, let me explain.

Socionics has 4 Quandras, right? Each quandra has a certain set of functions that they value. For example, let me list the functions that each quandra values.

Alpha:
Beta:
Gamma:
Delta:

Now, according to standard Jungian theory and according to socionics theory both, in order to reach the transcendent function you must learn to use the functions that are weak to you and do not at the same time contradict and weaken your EGO block function. This is why "Dualisation" is considered to be so important in socionics theory, because it strengthens your contrary supplementary weak functions and why your "conflictor" is bad for your health, because your conflictor values functions that are so contrary to your ego block functions that they can not help but tear them apart and weaken them! These are essentially the functions of you Super-EGO and ID block, which you should avoid. You can not reach the transcendent function if you are in a solid unavoidable relationships with your conflictor!!!! However, being in a close relationship with your dual would help you to reach the transcendent function, which is the goal in both Jungian and socionics theory.

In any case ... I do have an interesting question here. Does this mean that there are 4 transcendent functions? One for each Quandra and Quandra values? It would make sense to say that this is the case, unless of course you really do not believe in a thing called types. You can not say that there is one transcendent function, because not everyone values the same functions.

What do you guys think????

[Republicus]

transcendent function?

I don't remember reading about with that term. What book is this in, or is the transcendent function termed something else anywhere?

[Angel von Himmel]

Well, since no one has commented yet with any knowledge about it ... I'll list some links.

In these links it says that the

"transcendent function is the union between the conscious and unconscious"

[spoil:9b6c2865c6]http://web.ukonline.co.uk/phil.williams/transcendent-function.htm
http://www.online.pacifica.edu/pgl/stories/storyReader$520[/spoil:9b6c2865c6]

In the following link it says:

"Transcendent function. A psychic function that arises from the tension between consciousness and the unconscious and supports their union. (See also opposites and tertium non datur.)"

[spoil:9b6c2865c6]http://www.compilerpress.atfreeweb.com/1.%20Jungian%20Lexicon.htm[/spoil:9b6c2865c6]


This one link gives a more varying definition:

Once a complex has been individuated, the transcendent function works to integrate that complex into a single unified Self, which, when it develops, encompasses and replaces all other complexes, becoming the whole of personality.

[spoil:9b6c2865c6]http://intropsych.mcmaster.ca/psych2b3/lectures/jung-2.html[/spoil:9b6c2865c6]


Something written on the cover of a book concerning the "Transcendent Function"

The transcendent function is the core of Carl Jung's theory of psychological growth and the heart of what he called individuation, the process by which one is guided in a teleological way toward the person one is meant to be. This book thoroughly reviews the transcendent function, analyzing both the 1958 version of the seminal essay that bears its name and the original version written in 1916. It also provides a word-by-word comparison of the two, along with every reference Jung made to the transcendent function in his written works, his letters, and his public seminars.

[spoil:9b6c2865c6]http://www.amazon.com/Transcendent-Function-Psychological-Dialogue-Unconscious/dp/0791459780[/spoil:9b6c2865c6]

It says in this link that the transcendent function is indeed a function of the psyche:

Jung here defines the transcendent function as not only an analytical method but also a natural function of the psyche (Dehing, 1993, p.222). Thus, the transcendent function is not only the thinking that a subject applies to matter, but also an inborn structure of the psyche, the mind (Inwood, 1992, p.79).

[spoil:9b6c2865c6]http://www.improverse.com/ed-articles/matthew_clapp_1997_feb_jung_column.htm[/spoil:9b6c2865c6]

This link says:

Nearly everyone who is familiar with Jungian psychology is aware that Jung had a deep interest in symbols and a symbolic understanding of events and images. When students of Jungian psychology first hear of the "transcendent function," however, many are surprised to learn that Jung equated it with "symbol." It is well that he did so; a true symbol is indeed transcendent and "function" suggests its active nature. The symbol transforms by bringing opposites together and transcending them. As Jung put it, the transcendent function is "the transition from one condition to another" (Let-I, p. 268). When this Congress theme was adopted, it elicited a remarkable variety of papers devoted to broadening and deepening our understanding of the transcendent function.

[spoil:9b6c2865c6]http://www.daimon.ch/3856305378_2P.htm[/spoil:9b6c2865c6]


Now, I know for a fact that the transcendent function is technically the midpoint between all of the other functions, but I can not find the quote where it says this although I know it is in one of Jungs books. I remember specifically reading and seeing a chart that shows the transcent function with the other functions. I will show you pretty much what the chart looked like:

[Angel von Himmel]

Anyone want to comment who is not just totally lost?

[Exodus]

Whatever this is, it's not a function.

(Not in the same way that, say, Ne is a function.)

I like the idea, however. Something funny happens to dualized people.

[Angel von Himmel]

Whatever this is, it's not a function.

(Not in the same way that, say, Ne is a function.)

I like the idea, however. Something funny happens to dualized people.

Did you even bother reading to quotes I put up? Jung calls is a function of the psyche ... Ne is a function of the psyche.

[Exodus]

So?

[Angel von Himmel]

So?

Does that mean that there are 4 of them?

[Exodus]

So?

Does that mean that there are 4 of them?

If all the transcendental function refers to is dualization and a balancing of the personality, I would say yes, it is different for different quadra values--perhaps in the sense that each quadra holds different ideals for a "balanced" individual. But in that case, you might as well say it's different for every type.

[Angel von Himmel]

Well, technically it probably is the same for atleast the 4 members of each quadra, because they are all trying to actualize the same with what they value.

[discourse]

I'd like to hear some comments on this from real psychologists. Because it's all complex and needs professionality to understand. Anyone ready to take a word on it?

_

Like your quotations say, the transdendent function is not an usual function. It's not like Si, Te, Ni or Se.It's something else. As I understand, its a function what happens when unconciousnes and conciousness are uniting. It should happen somewhere in the midage. Where the midlife crisis happens. And what also starts the individuation process. And the transdendent function is the result of that. Though the individuation process, the center of Jungs teachings, is a lifelong process.

Unfortunatelu I have no links or quatetions to give to you, readers, to illustrate,to make them more understandable, my definations.

_

Hope I'm understandable, because I am poor at explaining things.

[Angel von Himmel]

Jung did indeed make quotations to something to the effect that the transcendent function occurs somewhere around middleage, but he did not remember that he necessarily indicated that it had to happen at middleage. Plus, I founf the quoatation last night again were Jung said specifically the the transcendent function is a function like the other functions and specifically calls it a fifth function. I wanted to scan the page in the book, but I forgot to bring it with me again so I might have to do that tommorow.

[tcaudilllg]

Jung did indeed make quotations to something to the effect that the transcendent function occurs somewhere around middleage, but he did not remember that he necessarily indicated that it had to happen at middleage. Plus, I founf the quoatation last night again were Jung said specifically the the transcendent function is a function like the other functions and specifically calls it a fifth function. I wanted to scan the page in the book, but I forgot to bring it with me again so I might have to do that tommorow.

Jung associated the transcendental functions with archetypes. He said there were four: the shadow, the soul, the syzygy, the messiah child, and the self.

What's particularly interesting regarding Jung, is that he talked about living as an extrovert in his youth, then as a young adult shutting himself off from the world and drawing deep within himself, effectively introverting. This suggests he was an extrovert who experienced an introverted transcendental function. Jung describes early life behavior as "infantile", and adulthood as a state of semi-maturity due to the acceptance of a part of oneself. (the personal shadow) Then much later, at mid-life, comes the union of oneself with the soul, the syzygy.

I can only speak for my own experience, but I see the transcendental function as a way to influence subconscious content. For example, by activating my personal knowledge function "in place of" my base, I can influence what I experience as personal knowledge.

I've talked to adults who have learned to withdraw and "take stock of their situation" as they got older, including, recently, a professor of psychology. He believed that people naturally become more introverted as they get older; he was surprised when I told him I was experiencing the reverse.

The personal knowledge function is very aggressive and stubborn: it knows no objective truth and desires only the acceptance of its own subjectively-experienced truths. It makes sense that one would desire to avoid letting it interfere with the processing of the base. I only use my transcendental function when I feel that I am being surrounded by something... this is usually due to other adults making use of their transcendental function and clustering towards personal knowledge-driven ideological ends. When I invoke personal knowledge, the world I knew in my childhood vanishes, and is replaced by a sort of spiritual war of opposites in which everyone seems to take a side.... There are liberals, and conservatives, and people "in the middle" who seem to have a split of their own between a syzygy of traditionalism with aristocracy versus a sort of mixture of positive reform and anarchy....

People tend not to talk about these sort of things openly because it creates a tension... in particular opposing personal knowledge ideologies don't seem able to understand each other directly.... (that's in my experience) Like shining two lights out of phase with each other... a patch of darkness in the midst of the beams....

ESFps never talk about this stuff; ESFjs notice it but keep it to themselves. INTjs use it for political advantage.... (that's why they're called "idiosyncratic"...)

One problem with this experience is that 1) you're faced with an inherently tragic reality of only being able to do so much, barely fending for yourself against a whole host of hostile people and always finding yourself on the brink of an all-out bloodfest it seems between "your side" and "their side", and 2) you don't know exactly how people's roles fit into the larger picture of objective progress. The sides are supposed to work together, and effect a kind of "providence" that keeps human progress humming along. (or at the least from going backward) Perhaps if you could receive suggestive "5th function" content as regards your role you could better understand where you and others fit in the larger scheme of things.

Maybe Expat, who is older, could shed some light on the experience of 5th function as role.

[UDP]

Whatever that image of a book is, it is absolutely atrocious. The writing below it is pointless, if all you know is what is in displayed in this thread.


Anyway, I think I know what Jung is referring to, but I think he is caught up in his own psychobabble. It does not seem like he can explain it well outside of his own psychological system, and there is a certain limitation to that.

Intuitively I think I understand what he is referring to, and I believe it has something to do with the ennagram shifts of 1 & 5 to 7&8, as well as my own experiences, wondering if I was LSI, or an extroverted type, etc.



There are so many factors.... I don't know where to begin.


As for what Tcau said, I can relate somewhat...
And I can intuitively grasp what he said about ESE, SEE, and LIIs (I have noticed this too, but I don't know how to describe it).

Personal knowledge...
Considering it is the opposite orientation of your leading function (Te for a Ti type, Se for an Si),
I imagine that has something to do with the balancing process. Balancing, and the balance itself allows you to see beyond the inherent lopsidedness. When you are balanced, you can see beyond the polarization of the functions.


To me this relates very much to buddhism, and also daoism. The story of the two gates, and specifically the first 'chapter' of the dao de ching.
In some ways I see (what may be the) the transcendental function allows for first seeing the unmanifested, but then the greater mystery over time, between the manifested and the unmanifested -- the source of both. Whether that aligns with jungs idea of the transcendental function or not, I don't know, as I've never heard about the transcendental function until this thread, but I could understand some sort of a connection to what I mentioned in this paragraph

[krieger]

The freaky thing is that a trancendental function that encompasses all functions cannot in the static sense exist. It would be the same as glancing at unprocessed garbled data. Our functions exist to make separations in data, so that we can tell chaos from order. You unite the functions in a single node again after the separation process, and the data becomes incomprehensible once again.

Its interesting to think about what a function of "united statics of objects" looks like though.

[Exodus]

The freaky thing is that a trancendental function that encompasses all functions cannot in the static sense exist. It would be the same as glancing at unprocessed garbled data. Our functions exist to make separations in data

Quite right.

That is a good way of looking at it.

[tcaudilllg]

For some time on this forum I've observed the existence of a so-called "transcendental function" as a means of exchanging the function contrary to the base (the personal knowledge) function with the base in the ring of Model-A. I have suggested that this is a voluntary action that becomes psychologically accessible in early adulthood.

Although I have not found direct evidence of the personal knowledge function at the beginning of information metabolism cycles (the progression of which may be evident in a person's speech), I have recently considered (I noticed Jonathan has been having similar thoughts) the possibility that the transcendental function may act as a filter for the use of personal knowledge information by the base.

Most immediately, I can observe my own speech in this regard. I have two modes of thinking, the first being a knowledge-independent, rigorous mode that is useful for processing external field static () information, but is vulnerable to attack by those individuals who find disagreeable or plausibly dangerous. Throughout my early childhood, I operated exclusively in this mode. Skeptical of knowledge or of the need for effective communication as a means of thinking, I was forced instead to indulge in what UDP has often described as "retreat to ". I understood little of bonds between people, people could like me or could not and all I could do was try to make them to the extent that it seemed reasonable. This all changed when I allowed myself, in a momentous decision that culminated an intensely personal internal journey, to acknowledge communication as a means of thinking: to rely on external feedback in indescriminant form as a means of appraising the accuracy (or better, acceptability) of my own thoughts.

I understood this reasoning of inner resource, or dynamic field feedback, to be a distinctly pheonomenon: it was always on a person-to-person basis, never between more than one person.
For the longest time I thought that this dynamic was accomplished by simply exchanging the function order between the personal knowledge and base functions -- the 1st with the 7th, and the 7th with the 1st. But recently I have imagined that perhaps what is really happening when I am utilizing this dynamic feedback mode is that the 7th function is hovering in the background, feeding with the knowledge of which it is personally aware and approving of. With this limited knowledge range as base, can assert "true" structure and "untrue" structure, the line between truth and untruth being a dictate of . By building structure on only that which is "true", can structure the world in a way that others who accept the same truth will embrace. Because always receives its information from without, the ideological persuasion of allows it to communicate effectively with individuals of the same persuasion, and with as a resource can create structure that can be embraced by the entirety of that persuasion. At first this would seem counterproductive to the efforts of the individual to find acceptance, because individuals of the conflicting persuasion will necessarily be alienated by their incomprehension of 's selective knowledgebase. However in practice there is no substantial difficulty due to the use of as a natural function of aggression that regularly manifests in individual speech. Furthermore, there is another potential advantage to the use of personal knowledge as a guiding factor: the possibility that can reciprocate as a structural mechanism for , thus giving objective grounding to ideas that are otherwise as far removed from objectivity as possible. Thus by the transcendent function the objective goals of survival against objective, universal threats (natural disasters, forces of nature, entropy, etc.) are infused with unique, abstracted vantagepoints that are free from objective influence, this freedom allowing for a coherency of thought and cooperation that reliance on objective considerations alone would not allow. (for example, contrast the tendencies of governments of similar political party dominance to cooperate with each other against the motives of "national unity" governments to resist influence by other governments at any cost) The objective world, by the reversely transcendent function, compensates in kind by allowing the personal-knowledge motivated group to apprehend as a unit the need for cooperation with individuals of other personal-knowledge groups, and to agree to the formation of social contracts between itself and them.

Although throughout most of this discussion I have focused on the role of transcendency, I suspect that this rule holds true for , , , , , , and dominants as well, with the transcendental quality manifesting as the appearance of personal knowledge in the apprehension of the base ( for , for Si:, for , for , for , and for ) and the appearance of the base's element as a factor of personal knowledge's apprehension of the world without it.

[Angel von Himmel]

I am going to have to go read through this later when I have more time, looks interesting!

[tcaudilllg]

I suspect that pathological types are "born transcendent": they experience the transcendental function (all four forms) as a norm, rather than the exception. Transcendence for them means using a function on its own, rather than with its contrary. This would explain their tendency to be highly nationalistic, ( (Amadinejad, Stalin), (******)) among other things.

Something I believe extremely interesting: the transcendence of the creative function may play a role in the acceptance of one's own death. Transcendence of the creative function is represented by the "messiah child" Jung spoke of.

[discourse]

Now that I mentioned the trancendent function in my other posting, describing it according to Jung, who mentioned it as something undescribable. Like being Lightened. I would like to complement my saying. I don't understand how it feels, as I am too young for that. I believe we get the trancending experience in our midlife. It should be something religious and profound. But still I would like to add something. Jung describes it as living by the Dao. This life cognizance is very complex and has many levels to achieve, at least that's the way I see it. And on one level, it feels like being with your dual. So if you wish to know how does it feel to have the trancendent function? Then it should feel like being long time together with your dual. Becoming whole in an heavenly complemented way. But the phenomenon is far more deeper than this. I speculate it has something to do also with becoming strongly attached with your inner Self archetype, with that godlike peace in our souls.
So when it all happens, it will change the person permanently.

[tcaudilllg]

Yeah, and didn't he say the transcendent function (soul-wise) always takes the form of the opposite sex? Physically, indeed. ...I've had some experiences recently with pathological liberal-minded people; women, precisely. I wonder if they are symbols, in a sense, of what Jung called "the struggle" with the anima/animus.

That, and I'm finding it quite hard to cultivate anything more than "friendly" relationships with my dual.

Here's a question: how many ENTps would find Einstein's General Relativity theory to be of personal spiritual significance?

[tcaudilllg]

I've prepared somewhat of a draft model of Jung's transcendental function as it relates to Model A. From what I can tell, the purpose of the transcendental function is not simply to enlarge one's relationship with the psyche, but to gain increasing levels of control over it. Specifically, it allows the conscious and subconscious elements of the psyche to work together to produce the best possible situation. The more transcendental functions are engaged, the better the relationship.

1st Function - receives awareness of instinctual motives (7th function) by which to positively
influence the 2nd function.

2nd Function - receives awareness of the collective unconscious (8th function), by which one
creates for oneself a role in the psyche.

3rd Function - receives awareness of suggested information (5th function) by which to harmonize
one's role with the pursuit of social security for oneself.

4th Function - receives awareness of hidden agenda information (6th function) by which to
influence suggestive function content.

5th Function - receives awareness of role information (3rd function) by which to influence the
6th function.

6th Function - receives awareness of PoLR information (4th function) by which to influence the
7th function.

7th Function - receives awareness of well-formed information (1st function) by which to
positively influence the 8th function.

8th Function - receives awareness of created psychic information (2nd function) by which to
harmonize one's contributions into the collective unconscious and produce an
ideal range of base data. (1st function)

[tcaudilllg]

As I see it, there are two ways to use transcendent functions. The first way is to let the conscious function of the pair choose from the pool of information available to the conscious function that which is most suitable to the situation. This choice is compensated for by the unconscious function's option of choosing from consciousness' pool of information that which is most useful to itself. It is not an equal relationship, however: consciousness chooses what information is made available to unconsciousness at its own volition and in service to its own ends.

The second way is to let the unconscious function master the relationship: consciousness sees only what the unconscious wants it to see. Similarly, the unconscious has its pick of unconscious content at its leisure.

[tcaudilllg]

It suprises me that this theory -- which is arguably more significant than the dual-type theory -- doesn't get attention.

[krieger]

Translated to stuff that I can use:

You're saying that each conscious function is directly connected to the function inverse in introvert/extrovert in the unconscious blocks.

There is also a two way transfer between each going on.

Comment:

My intuition was that there is a similar connection between functions with their complement function; for example 1st with 5th, 2nd with 6th, etc.

Perhaps both are true, and there is a constant balancing between the 'healthy' kind of backup from the complement function and the 'unhealthy' kind of backup from the contrary one.

Limiting/empowering is of importance here... A limiting function always has contrary and complementary functions that are empowering.

[tcaudilllg]

About the 1st/5th etc. thing: my thought has been in similar directions lately. It seems to me that the weak functions are weak because they are suppressed by the strong functions. In particular, the weak functions appear to be "hovering", while the strong functions are "grounded".

Consider the 1st and 5th functions for INTj. Function 1 knows exactly where its data comes from, and accepts it as fundamental. e.g. logic is its own justification. Of course you can only be certain of one's logic by understanding what data underlies it, linking the causes to effects empirically, but even still logic can persist without certitude of anything but it's own principles. (young INTjs operate in this very manner, as did I)

is different. accepts emotions and "experiences" as being real, but they seem to have no precise origin. Neither can they be relied on because they cannot be "tested". ENTjs feel the same way about : their feelings are there, but there seems to be no place from which they come. They "float", ghostlike yet noticable.

I believe the 5th function is "suggestive" and "unconscious" because one needs a sense of certainty first and foremost, but after it is gained there is no further role for it in the personality. One needs a bridge to the unconscious to serve as an anchor to the external world. If one understood the principle of the unconscious, then it would not have its mysterious nature, and without that there would be no reason to explore the external world. (no "mysteries" to solve)

Obviously in the case of the ENTj it is the internal world that is mysterious, but the same principle applies.

[tcaudilllg]

As regards the relationship between the contraries, consider this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_will_to_power

I posit this, and I will stand by it. Der Wille Zur Macht = conscious relationship between functions 1 and 7. (life affirming behavior is 7 sampling 1, life denying is 1 sampling 7). Schopenhauer's "will to live" = 1 sampling 7.

It's intuitive connections like this that make socionics the starting point for a new study of philosophy.

[tcaudilllg]

I've finally unlocked the mystery of this thing. What I've discovered is something very... awkward and socially problematic, not to mention morally problematic.

But let us discuss it anyhow, because certainly there are problems already in existence and even if new problems are posed by its substance, at the very least it answers a multitude of the questions already faced.

PURPOSE OF THE TRANSCENDENTAL FUNCTION

The transcendental function is the act of putting an information element's lingo into terms its contrary will not only understand, but accept as true and valid. For example, the Ti dominant who has invoked the transcendental function knows to limit their range of theoretical considerations to the truth of their external situation; i.e., to the facts. In return for this, the facts agree to define themselves on Ti's terms. What was chaotic and "self-justifying" becomes orderly and causal: every fact is inferred as product of causal relations between other facts. Therefore there is a marked difference between the scientific expert who checks their models against the facts they have, and the theoretician who retreats from the world while forever trying to argue the non-existence of "truth". The one is at peace with the reality of their situation, the other is determined to impress upon the world the supremacy of their logic. Of course, peace is a relative term: the expert who is divided against themselves internally will appeal to the supremacy of causality and justice against Te's pragmatism and expediency, although this is invariably a situation of great personal anxiety and pain for either side.

But why would there be such a split at all? What forces exist in our world that make peace and tolerance temporary, and final resolution unattainable? The answer, as we shall see, is two-fold.

Our personalities exist within our brains: they are the interplay of our memorized experiences with our genetically coded balances of various neurotransmission chemicals. Although the context of our existence is determined by experience, our attentions to the various parts of this experience are directed entirely by these genetic balances: a little more of this neurotransmitter than this one, and you'll be more X and less Y; offer the reverse, and you'll be more Y and less X.

Although many would like to consider genetic expression a gradient that cannot be precisely defined, the gradient approach ignores the fact that genes do not operate like switches: they are the determinants of proteins, the vast matrix of which and the timing of their production allows genes to express themselves in various degrees of cell differentiation. However the whole must operate in harmony with itself, and in any successful system there are winning traits and losing traits. The losing traits lose, the winners take all, and whenever a potential conflict arises the winners will dominate. We thus have a solid link between the structure of our genes, and the structure of our personality.

Whenever a structure exists, there exists a capacity for its inversion. Einstein said it best, "for every system K, K'". Obviously such a claim can only be a principle or hypothesis, and not a law because it cannot be proven in all cases. However, there does seem to exist a counterpart to the trancendental function, as surely as there exists a contrary force to the ego in our civilization. Let us call this counterpart the reverse transcendental or "rescendent" function.

Whereas the transcendental function attempts to impress acknowledgement of its consciousness' importance on the unconscious/subconscious, the rescendent function attempts to impress the importance of the unconscious -- that which is vaguely understood or even perverse or nihillistic -- onto consciousness. Obviously this impression is ill-met: the subconscious is such because it is inimicable to society, and to usefulness. But when an outlet is discovered through which the wiles of the id and the fruits of nihillism may find expression socially, the rescendent function's handiwork may be observed.

OPERATION OF THE RESCENDENT FUNCTION

The influx of subconscious content into conscious consideration is made possible by the use by the sunconsciously motivated -- the sociopaths, the psychopaths who deal in fear and preach hate of all that is different from themselves, who lead men astray and wonder why society has turned against them for manipulating the masses towards their own perverse ends -- of their ego functions to scrutenize the content they are trying to suggest for its relevance to objective causes and intentions. That which does hold the promise of acceptance is rejected; and yet that which could be so construed, whatever the ends to which it is proposed, will be accepted. The circumstances of Adolf ******'s rise are a case in point: in a time of widespread hardship in the German state, unity towards a single plan of action was needed, and the ethnocentric tendencies of orthodox Judiasm to look out for Jews before Germans were naturally a problem. ****** used these circumstances to suggest his hate for Jews as a positive contribution, and his ideal of a racially pure German state as a plan for Germans to accomplish. Although ******'s proposition was morally despicable, millions of Germans faced financial hardship largely on the basis of their nationality alone, and in such desperate straits they were willing to accept any solution that could be offered, no matter how desperate. ****** offered not only a solution, but a path to the future that culminated in the ideal. Many Germans were only too eager to sell their souls in exchange for the fulfillment of their dreams.

We can observe the transcendent function at work today. Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmedinejad attempts to squeeze the advent of Israel's non-existence onto the page of history, representing the conflict of his agenda () with the debt he must render to society. () We often hear in the aftermath of a school shooting how the shooter, if he survives, blames "the culture of violence" for his rampage; indeed, one can reason that under the logic of the rescendent function, the prevalance of violence in the mainstream media offers a justification by which to let the 7th function's rage and anger make itself felt under objective conditions. By believing that media violence can encourage people to be violent, we allow the outlet for its manifestation under rescendent logic.

In light of these observed phenomena, and their relevance to the problems of our day, we easily establish the persistence of a rescendent quality contrary, but not opposing, the transcendent. Let us now speak of the opposite of either, the pursuit and attainment of immanence.

CHARACTERISTICS OF IMMANENT FUNCTION

When the tension between the opposites is too great for either to perceive the possibility of a resolution between them, then there is no attempt made by either side to bridge their differences. Inevitably the stronger will win out, but victory has its compensation: nature abbhors a vaccum, and will seek to neutralize a victor in proportion to their victory. A complete victory will be met with a complete loss, and a complete loss with a complete victory. Action and reaction: immutable, inevitable, and carried by the laws of physics into the domain of the psyche. Therefore if at the time appointed by a person's genetic coding for the resolution of a conflict between two contrary elements of themselves there is no grounds for the resolution, the person will be struck with a drive for absolute victory over that which they believe incarnates the function most antagonistic to their person. Their mind becomes polar and unstoppably driven: they compell the moderate to weakness and raise high their swords of war. The world under their auspice polarizes into us and them, and those who would join them in their catestrophic clash cluster about like a swarm. The irrelevant is dismissed, the middle is brought to nothing. Polarity is the only constant, and the side opposite themselves is the devil's legion itself.

On such grounds and by such principles does war begin: like Loki and Heimdall, destined adversaries fall upon each other by the multitudes in mutual annihilation. The battle need not be fought with blood, however: the pacifist leader who seeks to give of themselves for peace may make a move against the rescendent function itself, and offer his own body in exchange for the victory. Culture is a vital component of how the immanent's tactics, as is individual temperment. The fight need not even be against other humans: there are some who carry out their march to doomsday in their own bodies, doing battle with a regretful malady passed down by heredity. But whether the affliction is physical or mental, the outcome will always be the same: the individual will win, only to lose.

Let us not limit ourselves to the interpretation of immanence as solely a feature of the courageous and forthright: the distraught psychopath may well seek to take whatever glimmers of light they can with them as they plummet into hell. The Columbine Massacre offers a demonstration of the case in point. Dyan Klebold and Eric Harris found reconciliation with the objective world unthinkable: all the world seemed to them to be under the rule of an instinct denying "god", and refusing to accept the reign of objectivity the duo sought to destroy god by destroying those who believed in him. No more fully did the work of God show itself than in the face of Rachel Scott, who according to her journal repeatedly subjected herself to self-loathing because she was, in her words, unable to live up to the glory of god. God, she said, regularly chastized her for not reaching out to others and living as an "upright" moral person should. This is an important point: that "God" behaved in Rachel's mind as an autonomous complex, a psychic force strong enough to antagonize consciousness. God always won out; she was incapable of asserting that her self-loathing was detrimental to her person. The strong awareness of Rachel's thinking demonstrates itself as divorced from : her failings come from not considering others' subjective experiences, instead placing everything in an ethical light that she herself cannot live up to. All her life is dedicated to pleasing God in spite of her inability to do so. If only she could live up to God's expectations, she could have the means to feel good about herself. But the problem is not that she cannot please God -- that is contrary to Fi's objective ethicality, and is thus perfectly reasonable and just --, but that god is displeased with her. The problem lies not in her but in the expectations of the unfair God, and it is this very God who must be overcome by the will of the ego.

These struggles come to their conclusion in the Columbine Massacre. Rachel proves her worthiness to God by refusing to deny his existence to those whom God afflicts most, and completely overcomes all of "God's" former criticisms. She has overcome herself, and therefore, overcome God. By overcoming God she becomes God, setting herself as the incarnation of her captors' hatred at the moment of their fullest power. It is of the utmost recklessness: her internal drive for self-validation has prevailed by dominating her sense of self so fully that only the drive continues to matter, overcoming her sense of self-preservation entirely.

Rachel is not alone. Others are willing to stand against the onslaught of the subconscious "devil" for various reasons, but none more important than simply the breaking back of the tide. The ego, as the vessel of consciousness, is naturally supreme due to its capacity to think by means of mutual interests, as opposed to private interest alone. The pool of all egos, the collective consciousness, will prevail against the subconscious, which is literally divided against itself. It is inevitable. When the police arrive, the light of consciousness is at its fullest brightness: the concerns of the ego have been translated into the concerns of society, and now all consciousness -- the ego and the superego -- is engaged in the struggle to beat back the absolute dark.

But darkness is controlled, as always, by the id, and the id always looks out for its own purposes first and foremost. Rachel is dead; the light that threatened to blind the id is no more. The id knows it cannot destroy light completely, but perhaps there exists the potential for a precedent. Perhaps a legacy can be shaped from which other incarnates of the dark may draw, perhaps ultimately extinguishing all the light even today. And besides, what does the id have to gain from jail? From execution? There is no way out. Time to end it. Immanence has its compensation, and the ego must be denied its crave.

Although Rachel and her captors were all motivated by immanence, the aims of immanence were reversed. On the one hand Rachel desired the complete destruction of her human personality on behalf of satisfying her desire for sef-validation. The shooters on the other, desired the destruction of anyone who would reach for such objective purity, because such purity exiles the id, and with it the capacity to live. Rachel and others like her found their antithesis in the id-worshipping Kebold and Harris, and whether they knew it or no sowed their own demise by appealing to their one-day captors to seek the objective purity they feared and despised. Were they mistaken? Only from the angle of transcendence.

Sources
Trancendence, Immanence

• "Plane of Immanence" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plane_of_immanence
• "Philosophy of Transcendence" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transce...8philosophy%29
• The Portable Jung
• The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich

Figures, events

• "Scott, Rachel" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachel_Scott
• The Journals of Rachel Joy Scott: A Journey of Faith at Columbine High
• "Iranian leader 'petty, cruel dictator,' school president says" - http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/24/us.iran/index.html

EDIT Sept 27th: Finished, but in need of revision.

[tcaudilllg]

Reflections on the transcendental function

- Never count out someone who is capable of acheiving full transcendence of the psyche: they will always come out a winner, even if they have to lose a little to get the win. (and they will always lose something, because the psychic exchange must be even.)

- The eras of trancendence mirror Jung's stages of life concept. In particular, the soul or anima is said to counter the attitude of the dominant function. (Dreams and Alchemy) The thinker's soul is emotional and empathic, the feeler's logical and expedient. One may infer that a relationship between and would heighten the conflict between and , and vice versa.

- A person who seems on the verge of total victory will be facing trouble in the very near future, this because their victory is always leaving out some vital elements that someone wiser and more experienced than themselves (read: possessing higher levels of transcendence) will be capable of exploiting for thier own purposes.


Reflections on the immanent function

- These people have limited psychic lifespans. Beyond a certain point they may live, but they will be unable to grow and will be burdens to their society. (see the point about hard-lining and compromise below) In a perfect world they could live completely oblivious to even the most miniscule manifestations of the elements they hate; but that world is not earth, nor is it anywhere within the "mortal realm" of change and balance we call the universe.

- A person who is driven by immanence will become increasingly estranged from society as their absolutism is increasingly rejected by trancendence driven individuals. Jung called this the suicidal tendency, referring specifically to Neitzsche, himself an immanent. Neitzsche's positions became gradually more estranged from society until finally he could no longer adapt, and having an exceptionally severe nervous breakdown spent the few years left of his life in an asylum. The enemy he tried to overcome was the law of , also the element by which the authoritative God concept he so hated would be apprised. Neitzsche's ubermenche is described as a person who has the will necessary to destroy this "God" paradigm.

- Immanent conflicts are driven by divergences of attitude between the fundamental elements, T, F, N, and S. The dominant attitude ruthlessly attempts to repress the recessive, and this struggle is carried out in the personality by viewing all aspects of reality that can be attributed to the conflicting elements as naturally incompatible; indeed, any proposed evidence that such a resolution is possible at all will be dismissed as delusion, any means of the same impossible. Politically this tendency represents itself as a "hard-line" approach to various issues of import: until the stands the individual has made versus their enemies are removed from political discourse, there will be little chance for consensus to be reached, if any. The resolution of the immanent conflict removes the barrier to compromise and provides the means by which the compromise may be expressed. The transcendent may then use this compromise as means of moderating their own views and living in greater harmony with the whole. (individuation)

- Immanent people are loose cannons in positions of authority. They are always looking for fights and will invariably find them in those who's conflicts contrast their own. If either side can get their hands on an army, they will let nothing stop them from imposing their will on their chosen enemy. They will be further moved to repress any signs of an external resolution to the conflict raging within themselves by the same means. The responsible society judges a person's character for positions of social authority by discerning whether an immanent conflict exists within them. Never should an immanent person be given the capacity to exert their will on another, in any capacity; repression will invariably follow.

- Transcendent people should be openminded and willing to change. They should not let the immanent stand in the way of a better life for themselves and for others. If the immanent can positively contribute, then that is well and good. But when the stands of the immanent are the fuel of violence and dischord, then the immanent's value to society is lost. The transcendent commit only folly by protecting the immanent at the expense of their own persons and safety.

[krieger]

Heavy as always...

I'm I getting this correctly:

Imminent = pathological/shadow type?

[tcaudilllg]

Rescendent = pathological type, as the opposite of transcendence. It's the subconscious trying to impress itself upon consciousness, not the other way around.

Think of Ahmadinejad trying to impress upon the world the possibility that Israel could not exist, or that an Sharia Islam state could have nuke. That's what he's really trying to do. He would be open to either, probably, but only if a better alternative isn't offered. I personally think he's trying to end the Palestinian-Israelie conflict, and that he is a vessel for the subconscious' solution to the problem. (from one angle, at least) In any event, he makes the majority very uncomfortable because the majority is psychologically healthy. Pathological types always have these various scenarios in mind, as the reflection of consciousness' considerations.

Immanent can be either way; perhaps I need another term to differentiate between the pathological and "healthy" forms. Actually a strong argument can be made that anyone who dies before 60 was driven by immanence in at least one function. The age ranges for transcendence appear to be ~22, ~40, ~60, and death after 60. If death occurs between any of those periods, then the demise can be attributed to a failure to integrate the subconscious.

[tcaudilllg]

DRAFT

The transcendent function is invoked when two contrary elements of the same sign complement each other in the same function. This postulation allows the modeling of cognitive processes not currently recognized in socionics. Despite this, evidence for their existence is plain in the higher aspirations of human thought, and is the basis of all modern scientific understanding.

The strength of the transcendent function lies in its capacity to remove the personality from the the urge to "restore balance" to the psyche. Instead, balance is assumed as already present, although one is not recognizing it as such. The assumption of a balanced psyche has important implications for the remaining unbalanced functions. The companion function to the balanced in the same block (+Ne in LII, for example) is seen as the rock on which the balance rests. However, because the balance itself is timeless, being a function of stasis, the elements perceived by the companion are similarly eternal and immutable. It is by such means that the "higher truths" of the cosmos are realized.


Solitary forms:

-Ne/-Ni w +Fi/-Fe (IEE)

What it means:
People have their own unique path in life whose purpose is to bring out their potential. For them to have made it this far, they must have strong personal characteristics.


+Fi/+Fe w +Ne/-Ni (EII)

What it means:
There is a glimmer of goodness in everyone, no matter how deep their inner darkness. This goodness can be the gateway to a whole new world....

Example: The ministry of Jesus of Nazareth


+Ne/+Ni w +Ti/-Te (ILE)

What it means:
People have their own timelines that their potential energy is completely contained within. This truth has important theoretical implications.

Examples:
Einstein's theory of relativity


-Ti/-Te w +Ne/-Ni (LII)

"The facts at hand are in sufficient proportion to the logic available. How? Because the case is indeed such, meaning in turn that X structure must exist, timeless and ineffable."

What it means:
There are no problems with people's uses of logic. Given their limited range of facts, their logic is perfectly sound. But wait, people have limited ranges of fact? What does this mean? [...] Just the premise that people are of sound logic, despite what I may be inclined to believe, implies meaning in itself. This meaning should be investigated in full.

Examples: The great analytic philosophies; (Kant especially) probably Gulenko and for that matter, most LII direction of research. (this self-same text an example thereof)


-Ni/-Ne w +Fe/-Fi (IEI)

What it means:
Every person's path is governed by their own unique potential. This path gives them outlook X on the world...

Examples: (none yet)


+Fe/+Fi w -Ni/+Ne (EIE)

What it means:
I don't have to cheer anyone up, because their moods are perfectly fine despite what I may otherwise feel. I should be asking myself where these moods, which are intrinsic to our nature, will lead us....

Examples: Ronald Reagan's "it's morning in America"

[tcaudilllg]

1st revision.

[tcaudilllg]

DRAFT

When a function's background element is exchanged with its contrary's foreground element (effectively exchanging signs), then that pairing has, in Jung's words, "transcendended" normal psychic functioning. What does this mean?

Firstly, let's consider the implications of transcention for the remainder of the psyche.

[put Model-B table here]

As seen in the above table, Model-B cannot simply let such a disruption to the flow of psychic energy from positive to negative go unhindered. If you set a positive, then it is the natural flow of the psychic gradient to follow, . And if there already is an element in that place, what then?

There exists such a thing as psychic war, a form of intense neurotic conflict that is carried out not just within, but is projected into the world. Jung called the numerous forms of these projections "tricks" of the anima. In the context of a open bid, induced by the transcendent function, for the signs of the elements to collide against each other we may observe the different faces of these projections. Indeed, Jung calls them "archetypes."

Firstly let us acknowledge that the psyche is a dynamic thing and coming into contact with information will, in as much as we can apprehend it at all, compell us to make sense of it. Therefore when someone comes into contact with information that relates a background function with a foreground function, we will accept it even though we have no genuine understanding of it, per se. For example, take Al Gore's plea that the environment is changing, thus we must do whatever we can to stop it. In IM element terms, Gore's argument corresponds to "Our will should be directed towards sustaining the environment." When Gore offered this alternative viewpoint -- that the environment is changing regardless of the cause, and that we should do whatever is necessary to blunt the impact -- he transcended the debate. And as soon as that happened, the great political logjam over what was causing global warming began to become completely moot. A generation of scientists had fought over it like crazy, and all of a sudden, a new viewpoint emerges that compells them to lay down their swords altogether. Gore has become, by any measure of the concept, a "wise old man" whose wisdom is a light for mankind in an age of crisis.

How did Gore transcend and reframe the debate over global warming? By transcending the debate within his own mind.

A young person may have an inkling into what their views are, but no clear understanding of why. They have a notion of "good" that they recognize without knowing what is "good" about it, and a notion of evil that they observe as such without knowing what is "evil" about it. My own notion, as an INTj, was that aggressive violence against others made people feel bad and thus, was bad. But by that reasoning, is not any such conflict evil, and if so, are not positions taken that makes others feel badly evil, and therefore standard political discourse? I never really thought about it for many years. I tended to observe organizations that wanted to "take over the world" as bad. I imagined evil as something innate and geared toward control for its own sake. A very +Ti-Ne viewpoint of evil.

I cannot really describe how I transcendend to -Ti/-Te thought. It started with a gradual flirtation with imagining myself as an evil person. I flirted around with emulating a portrayl of a videogame villain called "Magic Emperor Ghaleon", an ISTj. The villain described himself as wanting to hurt those who hurt his friends. For some reason, this notion struck me: it seemed a sound rationale for evil. After a while I basically allowed myself to be all the things about others that I thought "evil" (without actually breaking the law or anything), until I became comfortable with them. Basically, I became ISTj-like for a while.

+Ti gradually rescended as it found its hatreds unwarranted and its perception of reality ungrounded; you might say it lost confidence in itself. As +Ti receded I gradually got used to using -Te, which +Ti had propped itself on, as a foundation for -Ti. +Ti had many profound experiences of reality. One in particular I recall was a sudden profound understanding of music's emotive meaning: some pieces seemed imminently correlated with fear, others with death, some joy or happiness... these are correlations -Fi is not apt to observe. I attribute these feelings to +Fi and +Fe coming to the fore along with +Ti; in essence my entire shadow overtook me for a time. (although I caution: I accepted this overtaking and willingly embraced it.)

Within a few weeks +Ti had completely returned to its place in the subconscious, apparently totally spent and convinced of its utter inferiority. I kept -Te around though, because it proved useful to -Ti as a filter of information.

When I elevate -Te into the background of my -Ti, my mind changes profoundly. My "constant image flickering" experience of +Ne vanishes and in its place emerges a kind of sensation of sorts. Some people tend to open up more to me in this state; others close up completely. The most noticable change is in how they my ideas are approached. An idea that is generated under the transcendent function is invariably controversial... I'm basing my ideas on my instincts and trying to put forward possibilities that are relevant to a timeline oriented towards the same. I'm content to let people go their own paths in this regard: I'll go my way, and if you don't like my path you can go yours... and we'll ask where the paths intersect after the fact. (in id block) However, a lot of people don't like this. Why? Apparently because I choose this form of thought under a neurotic state... on the one hand I want to proceed under a pretense that will allow me to build new relationships between people around me, something +Te won't let me do. (+ functions improve on things; to create something new you need a -) Letting people go their own ways -- indeed, pointing out their paths, no less -- lets people know exactly where they stand relative to me and gives them sound footing on how they want to relate to me. However, at the same time the urge for "one single, united path" remains. What I end up with are relationships that, although framed, are of varying quality. I find that some people's paths are very similar to my own, and indicative of common innate characteristics. Others disdain not only me but also those who walk alongside me on my path. (the vengence of -Ni) Still others express ambivalence.

[tcaudilllg]

Earthquake = +Ti breaking off from -Ti, meaning -Fe stops accepting +Fe.
Flame = +Fe forces itself onto -Fe, causing -Ti to break apart into +Ti.

Stay tuned.

[tcaudilllg]

Transcendence starts when all of a sudden you are faced with one of the great moral delimmas of the age, particularly something that affects you personally, and are allowed by spontaneous mental maturation to actually grapple with it not as something that you just accept, but really question and criticize. It's what is referred to as "critical thinking" in liberal arts institutions, but it cannot be taught. The critical thinking students are taught is, in fact, little more than the past examples of others who have grappled with transcendency, and some of those examples are better than others. What is taught too often is a system of belief, when what is really needed is the capacity to critique that belief. The problems are understandable in light of the fact that very few people truly understand what critical thinking really is.

Critical thinking advents when, by means of the transcendent function, you take a hard look at what exactly your views mean to that which you'd like to be. Do you views allow you to really, honestly perform the feats you'd like to? Do your deeds reflect the views you'd like to say you hold? First you've got to look at that which you really are, at what your alter ego really is and not that which you would make it out to be. You can look at people who you admire, people who did great deeds or whom held admirable positions, and aspire to be like them. But there is something about them that you can't really manage, something about them that just doesn't fit. This because, that part of you which you see in them, is not what it appears to be. It wants these things for your good, not necessarily the good of others. However, there is yet the potential for you to meet their standards, and that is what the transcendent function is all about.

Transcendency is all about questioning: what is it that you yourself are bringing to the table? Are you truly guiltless in the problems around you, or is there something about your point of view, or your method, which plays its own role in human dischord? Let us be clear that it is never a fault of the person but always a fault of the method or the viewpoint which is observed. If a fault of processing -- a maladaptive abnormality -- exists in the person, then introspection no matter how earnest is meaningless: only positions which can be processed by the person can be successfully apprehended and examined for inconsistency. Transcendency escapes the sphere of subjective valuation and reaches for that which is objectively valuable as a human being. This is why it is transcendent.

Transcendence begins first by identifying that one's own values are to be questioned. How did one come about the values one prizes? There is immediately recourse available on this question, but before transcendency is acheived biochemically it seems too dangerous, too damning, to consider. How does one admit one's own faults? How far do they reach? Could one have unknowingly chosen the path which leads to perdition? If one is in perdition, have one's own foolish, unjustifiable actions burned already the bridge to redemption? These are grave questions, and to satisfy them one must accept a grave answer because one IS Ivan the Terrible; one IS Dracula; one IS the Shredder; one IS the ruthless tyrant of a foreign land; one IS the Antichrist, or the criminal, or the serial killer; one IS the corrupt lobbyist; one IS Ebenizer Scrooge. All those things which one hates, one also is. And yet, one is also not all of these things. One learns to accept a dual identity of being both saint and devil, the ego and alter ego respectively, and to use either as standards of judgment against oneself. How will view A of the ego influence method B of the alter ego? How will method B of the alter ego reflect on view B of the ego? Views which lead to destructive action are themselves destructive, whether they appear to be or not.

It is vital that neither the ego nor the alter ego is exhalted over its counterpart. The purity of heart that the ego acheives by contrasting the alter ego with that which it wants the alter ego to become must not take precedence over the alter ego's own need for validation of its malice; indeed the alter ego will become all the darker but only at the individual's necessity. Yet the darkened alter ego is less of a threat than before, because it is now being processed equally to the ego and its world is being apprehended as a sort of "underworld" to the ego's "overworld". The alter ego is used to interact with this underworld in which all of its vices do in fact make very good sense: it becomes evident that nearly everyone else of similar age or above is interacting at this underworld level, and that one has indeed been at their mercy for as long as can be remembered. The mysterious conspiracies reveal themselves, their mechanations laid bare. The age-old draw of conspiracy theories is itself explained: we are all conspirators.

"We all float Dan; we all float down here...", said the clown in Steven King's novel. Under transcendence we are all floating about in the underworld, in the sewer beneath the asphalt streets. And even as we float we, like it, can't help but offer balloons to the little children who have not learned to float themselves. The allure of the shiny balloons draws us down, closer, closer....

But once we have managed to take on the devil, and put its heart into our hands, we have acheived a sense of mastery over it. We may slay it by the energies we are privy to as transcendent persons, but even then we cannot help but recognize that the demon we have slain was all too like us, only that we had the courage to admit this and to reach out to others who had. But too, we notice that having possession of those shiny balloons, we are all too capable of manipulating others, who have not faced the us in them, into flying with balloons of our own making. Thus we become that which we had once feared, and lurk in the shadows of the younger even as our forebearers lurked in ours. We do manipulate our friends and our allies, but only on grounds we and they very much believe in. The transcendent function makes good from evil, and shines light in the darkness....

A treatment of transcendence would not be complete without discussion of the virtues a mind at peace with its own nature offers. Our world is built upon the transcendent function: every belief; every aspiration; every technology; and every authentic testament is built upon it. It allows us to approach creation confident that we will succeed; it allows us to stand by that which we suspect to be true and to defend our opinions with supporting conclusions. It makes the uncertain certain, and the hypothetical theoretical. It has made us microwaves; cars; spears; lights; foods and everything else which is a part of our experience today. The transcendent function makes us who we are, and we turn away from it at the peril of forgetting who we are, and moreover how nature itself conducts its business. For we are nature and nature is us: the transcendent function makes the individual into a whole and the whole into an individual. Blindness to transcendence blinds us to the light before our very eyes.

[Not A Communist Shill]

To transcend is a business to which nature offers, is it not? Our world is business. For we turn away from ourselves, and do not look within. And now (in the modern era), instead of forgetting the winter of mountings the glorious sun of our opinions can give proportive transcendence. On the otherhand, fearful marches towards transcendence may mean that many should accept the virtues of their own minds.

[krieger]

Still not sure wether I have gone through this or not, and wether I ever will. Have you got anything concrete on your own experience of the episode? What happened to you when you "attained transcendence"?

[Not A Communist Shill]

It is your views that affect who admire you - people who once held admirable views can suddenly make the blood boil. Why manage such people when you cannot manage the process in ourselves? Too often and too lightly we state who we admire, and their role we see in the age. The 'something' in ourselves, the very acquisition of transcendency, can turn us into critics of others. However, the views you have are typically taught and held by mortal men. The position that you hold is more usually determined by the self-fashioned gods - only they can manage the direction of the age. To grapple with more than what you are taught can be dangerous, and is rarely fruitful.

[tcaudilllg]

Still not sure wether I have gone through this or not, and wether I ever will. Have you got anything concrete on your own experience of the episode? What happened to you when you "attained transcendence"?

It was a long process encompassing about five months. I'm still trying to figure out all the details of how it happened. There were two sides to it, in that it is partially a matter of being biochemically capable of the thought, and having the rationale for exploration of the same. I cannot pinpoint exactly where they diverge. This could be done if we had the technology to identify at what moment from the time of conception the biochemical change occurs. Pairing that with recollection would yeild an answer.

It did have something to do with a failed romance in that I couldn't give my partner what she wanted no matter how much I tried. (committment wise) That, coupled with feeling at the mercy of the conserved aspects which I tried very hard to gain the acceptance of, but could not because I didn't process them judiciously: I wanted acceptance from everything which didn't want me. I think that's the defining point, that because I was able to -- in the context of my biochemical ascension -- purify my own methods somewhat; was able to process aspects which arose in the context of those methods in harmony with conserved aspects that had been purified by the same; and was capable of using those aspects in turn to achieve the same level of harmony between the alter ego's own aspects. When the aspects stopped fighting, the elements stopped fighting too, and I was able to rearrange the 1st and 7th functions.