12.2. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model—Modifications.

In this chapter, I would like to introduce modifications of John Beebe’s Model. These modifications are possible to make thanks to the Mandala of Characters.

In the beginning, let me remind how John Beebe’s Model looks like.

In the next diagram, we can see the first main element of John Beebe’s Model. This element is the Archetypes that he distinguished.

The second main element of John Beebe’s Model is Function-Attitudes.

Function-Attitudes are a combination of:
— four basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, and Feeling),
— and two general attitudes (Extraversion and Introversion).

Specifically, the function-attitudes are as follows:

• Ne—Extraverted Intuition
• Ni—Introverted Intuition


• Se—Extraverted Sensation
• Si—Introverted Sensation


• Te—Extraverted Sensation
• Ti—Introverted Sensation


• Fe—Extraverted Feeling
• Fi—Introverted Feeling

The above Function-Attitudes arranged on the Mandala of Characters look as follows:

So, in John Beebe’s Model, we have 8 archetypes and 8 Function-Attitudes. And for each type of character, we have a different combination of Archetypes and Function-Attitudes.

Below is the table that shows how the Archetypes and Function-Attitudes are arranged for each character type. These types are MBTI® types. Myers–Briggs Type Indicator® was created by Katharine Cook Briggs and her daughter Isabel Briggs Myers. They build this indicator based on Carl Gustav Jung’s “Psychological Types”.

As I mentioned above, the Mandala of Characters allows making some modifications in John Beebe’s Model. Specifically, these modifications relate to Function-Attitudes. Let me remind you that the Function-Attitudes on the Mandala looks as follows.

As we can see above on the Mandala of Characters, in addition to the Eight Function-Attitude, (namely, Ne, Ni, Fe, Fi, Se, Si, Te, Ti), we have four more areas occupied by:
— Intuition (N),
— Feeling (F),
— Sensing (S),
— Thinking (T).

These are the basic psychological functions that Jung distinguished.

The modifications I would like to make in John Beebe’s Model relate to these four areas occupied by basic psychological functions.

John Beebe’s Model does not take these areas into account. However, I think we can include these four areas into John Beebe’s Model as well.

Thus, what we can do with areas of Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, and Feeling, so that they can be used in John Beebe’s Model?

Two diagrams that I made in update 1.24 can help us. In this update, among other things, I distinguished areas of Rationalism and Realism. I used the term “Realism” in the Mandala of Characters instead of the term “Irrationalism”.

The area of Rationalism and Realism in the Mandala of Characters are as follows:

As we can see, we have areas of rationalism above.

The areas of realism (or irrationalism) I show in the next diagram.

In each of the above diagrams, we have four stripes, two thicker and two thinner.

Thinner stripes we can see on the areas occupied by basic psychological functions. And as we can see, the shading (or gradient) on the thinner stripes is less intense than on thicker stripes. This means that Extraversion and Introversion in the areas of thinner stripes are weaker.

On the above stripes, we can also see:
— which Rationalism or Realism is Extraverted, and
— which Rationalism or Realism is Introverted.

Now, I would like to draw attention to thin stripes. On these thin stripes are also highlighted:
— Extraverted Rationalism and Realism, and
— Introverted Rationalism and Realism.

In distinguishing where on the thin stripes are:
— Extraverted and Introverted Rationalism
— and Extraverted and Introverted Realism,
helped me the Myers-Briggs types. It means helpful was the arrangement of the Myers-Briggs types on the Mandala of Characters.

At his point, however, I would like to focus on where we can find on the thin stripes the Extraversion and Introversion.

Also, I would like to point out that Extraversion and Introversion in these areas have a much weaker effect than on thick stripes. This is because, as I said before, areas of thin stripes are areas where the strongest are individual basic psychological functions. That is Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, and Feeling.

I think then we can say that Extraversion and Introversion on thin stripes are soft.

Now, keeping in mind that Extraversion and Introversion in the areas of basic psychological functions are soft, I think it is possible to modify the diagram on which I presented Function-Attitudes. This modification looks like this.

Now, we can see that I treated Function-Attitudes in the same way as I did before with Rationalism and Realism. It means, in the areas of basic psychological functions, I have shown that they can be divided into soft versions of the given Function-Attitudes.

Besides, I made such a change that areas of Function-Attitudes are represented as quarters, not as stripes. And we have quarters in can case of both typical and soft Function-Attitudes. Moreover, Soft Function-Attitudes are thinner than typical Function-Attitudes.

Overall, in the diagram above, we can see that each of the individual areas of basic psychological functions has been divided into two areas. That is:

• The area of Intuition is divided into:
  — soft Ni, that is, soft Introverted Intuition,
  — soft Ne, that is, soft Extraverted Intuition.
• The area of Sensation is divided into:
  — soft Si, that is, soft Introverted Sensation,
  — soft Se, that is, soft Extraverted Sensation.
• The area of Thinking is divided into:
  — soft Ti, that is, soft Introverted Thinking,
  — soft Te, that is, soft Extraverted Thinking.
• The area of Feeling is divided into:
  — soft Fi, that is, soft Introverted Feeling, — soft Fe, that is, soft Extraverted Feeling.

Now, having the above diagram, we can use it to modify John Beebe’s Model. Specifically, I will present individual 16 personality Myers-Briggs types using soft versions of Function-Attitudes.

As in the chapter describing John Beebe’s Model, each type I will present in two diagrams.

In the first diagrams, I will arrange John Beebe’s Model for given types on the Mandala.

In the second diagrams, I will show diagrams for given types based on the original Beebe’s Model. I will modify them if needed. Specifically, I will modify eight of the sixteen Myers-Briggs types. These eight types are those which we can find in the areas of basic psychological functions.

1. ENTP.

In the diagram above I have additionally placed 16 points denoting the Myers-Briggs types. One of the types is highlighted, that is—ENTP type. Therefore, the above diagram applies to this type.

Arrows with archetypes are now closer together than in one of the previous chapters about John Beebe’s Model. That is, in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”. This is because arrows with archetypes in this chapter will refer to:
— 8 Function-Attitudes that are used in John Beebe’s Model, and
— 8 light Function-Attitudes, which I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

Let me remind you that in the original John Beebe Model, are distinguished Eight Function-Attitude. As a reminder, below, I show how it looks like the diagram based on the original John Beebe’s theory. This diagram we can find in the mentioned-above chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

Below I present a diagram based on the original John Beebe’s Model for the ENTP type.

2. INTJ.

As we can see in the diagram above for the INTJ type, the arrows with archetypes distinguished by John Beebe are now in the areas of basic psychological functions. I did so because INTJ type is in the area of basic psychological function, which is—Intuition.

Now, in the case of the INTJ type, arrows indicate soft Function-Attitudes. So, it is a different arrangement than in John Beebe’s Model, where are used original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology.

For comparison, below, I present the previous diagram for the INTJ type, which I made based on the original John Beebe’s Model.

Since the INTJ type on the Mandala of Characters, we can describe using soft Function-Attitudes, I will also apply soft Function-Attitudes to the INTJ type diagram based on the original John Beebe’s Model.

For comparison, I will also remind you how it looks like the diagram based on the original John Beebe’s model for INTJ type.

Modifications like in the case of the above INTJ type will apply to seven more types. So, in total, these modifications concern eight types, which are:
— INTJ, which I presented above.
— INTP,
— ENFP,
— INFP,
— ESFJ,
— ESFP,
— ISTJ,
— ESTJ.

The above eight types on the Mandala of Characters are located in the areas of basic psychological functions. Therefore, to these types, I will make analogical modifications as for the INTJ type presented above.

The remaining eight types will look similar to the previous diagrams that I made based on the original John Beebe’s Model. These types are: ENTJ, ENTP, INFJ, ENFJ, ISFP, ISFJ, ESTP, ISTP.

3. ENFP.

In the case of the ENFP type, the situation is analogical to that as the INTJ type presented above. It means, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological functions. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, I made modifications to the original John Beebe’s Model. That is, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

4. INFJ.

In the case of the INFJ type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type INFJ, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

5. ENFJ.

In the case of the ENFJ type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type ENFJ, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

6. INFP.

In the case of the INFP type, the situation is analogical to the types located in the areas of basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, Feeling). These types are: INTJ, ENFP, INFP, ESFJ, ESFP, INTJ, ESTJ, INTP.

For these types, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological function. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, in the diagram for the INFP type, I made a modification to the original John Beebe’s Model. It means, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

7. ESFJ.

In the case of the ESFJ type, the situation is analogical to the types located in the areas of basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, Feeling). These types are: INTJ, ENFP, INFP, ESFJ, ESFP, INTJ, ESTJ, INTP.

For these types, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological function. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, in the diagram for the ESFJ type, I made a modification to the original John Beebe’s Model. It means, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

8. ISFP

In the case of the ISFP type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type ISFP, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

9. ISFJ.

In the case of the ISFJ type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type ISFJ, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

10. ESFP.

In the case of the ESFP type, the situation is analogical to the types located in the areas of basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, Feeling). These types are: INTJ, ENFP, INFP, ESFJ, ESFP, INTJ, ESTJ, INTP.

For these types, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological function. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, in the diagram for the ESFP type, I made a modification to the original John Beebe’s Model. It means, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

11. ISTJ

In the case of the ISTJ type, the situation is analogical to the types located in the areas of basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, Feeling). These types are: INTJ, ENFP, INFP, ESFJ, ESFP, INTJ, ESTJ, INTP.

For these types, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological function. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, in the diagram for the ISTJ type, I made a modification to the original John Beebe’s Model. It means, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

12. ESTP.

In the case of the ESTP type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type ESTP, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

13. ISTP.

In the case of the ISTP type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type ISTP, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

14. ESTJ.

In the case of the ESTJ type, the situation is analogical to the types located in the areas of basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, Feeling). These types are: INTJ, ENFP, INFP, ESFJ, ESFP, INTJ, ESTJ, INTP.

For these types, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological function. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, in the diagram for the ESTJ type, I made a modification to the original John Beebe’s Model. It means, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

15. INTP.

In the case of the INTP type, the situation is analogical to the types located in the areas of basic psychological functions (Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, Feeling). These types are: INTJ, ENFP, INFP, ESFJ, ESFP, INTJ, ESTJ, INTP.

For these types, arrows with the archetypes distinguished by John Beebe we can find in the areas of basic psychological function. Therefore, John Beebe’s archetypes refer to soft Function-Attitudes.

Below, in the diagram for the INTP type, I made a modification to the original John Beebe’s Model. It means, instead of original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology, we have soft Function-Attitudes that I distinguished in the areas of basic psychological functions.

16. ENTJ.

In the case of the ENTJ type, the change in the diagram above is only that the arrows with the John Beebe archetypes are closer to each other. So, basically, this diagram is almost the same as the diagram based on John Beebe’s Model I presented in the chapter—“12.1. John Beebe—Eight Function-Attitude, Eight Archetype Model”.

It means the above diagram is basically the same since the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are located in the areas of original Function-Attitudes, based on Jung’s typology. For this reason, the diagram below for the type ENTJ, according to John Beebe’s Model remains unchanged.

Thus, this is how my modifications of John Beebe’s Model look like. They rely on adding to Beebe’s Model—soft Function-Attitudes. On the Mandala of Characters, soft Function-Attitudes are located in the areas of basic psychological functions (namely, Intuition, Sensation, Thinking, and Feeling).

Below, I present John Beebe’s Model with my modifications for all sixteen Myers-Briggs types. In this diagram, we can once again see:
— which types are related to soft Function-Attitudes,
— and to which types are related the original Function-Attitudes based on Jung’s typology.

So, above I presented the modified version of John Beebe’s Model. Let me remind you that this modification relies on adding soft Function-Attitudes to John Beebe’s Model.

Next, I would like to present John Beebe’s Model in relation to the model of the psyche that I use in the Mandala of Characters. It is possible thanks to the above-modified version of John Beebe’s Model. Specifically, the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes are very helpful here.

In the diagram below, I present arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes for each type.

In the diagram above, most types’ arrows are not in their original position as in the 16 diagrams for individual types, which I presented earlier in this chapter. For most types, I turned arrows with archetypes.

It means I rotated them so that the arrows with the archetype “#1. Hero / Heroine” are now directed upward. Thanks to this, we can see the combinations of the arrangement of individual arrows with archetypes. And above, we can also see that there are eight such combinations.

Then, I will highlight these eight possibilities in the next diagram for the sake of greater clarity.

Apart from the eight combinations of arrows in the diagram above, we can also see which types apply to each combination. We see that each of the combinations applies to two types. And here, it is very interesting that the two types having the same arrow combination are oppositional. So, on the Mandala of Characters, they are located on opposite sides.

Another observation I would like to point out is that each type's arrows create a shape similar to a cross. This similarity to the cross means that the above arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes can be associated with the model of the psyche I use in the Mandala. Let me remind you that his model looks as follows:

As we can see, the model of the psyche that I use in the Mandala of Characters is in the form of a square. Then we can put arrows with archetypes inside. I show it in the diagram below.

Above, inside the model of the psyche, I placed the combination of the arrows for ESFP and INTJ types.

Personally, the fact that arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes, we can integrate into the psyche model delighted me very much. I think one fits the other very well.

Admittedly, the arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes do not accurately indicate the individual points that symbolize psychological states on the Mandala of Characters. However, if we enlarge these points, we can assume that archetypes’ arrows indicate individual psychological states.

In the diagram below, I have placed all eight combinations of arrows with John Beebe’s archetypes on the psyche model's background.

Analyzing the above diagram, I am also very delighted. This is because the different combinations of arrows confirm some of my assumptions about the energy movement in our psyche.

Let me remind you that the model of the psyche in the Mandala of Characters is divided into two parts. That is, into two triangles. In the above diagrams:
— the top triangle represents—Consciousness,
— and the bottom triangle—Unconsciousness.

Besides, we see four points:
— upper point represents—Conscious State,
— lower point—Unconscious State,
— points on the right and left represent—Strong or Soft Self-Esteem States (or Power or Vulnerable State). These points are on the border between Conscious and Unconscious Triangles.

In the Mandala of Characters, I assumed that:
— we can move between psychological states in various ways.
— and that our psychological states can change their position.

Therefore, the points on the right and left can play the role of Power or Vulnerable States. So, these states can change places.

Conscious and Unconscious States can also switch places, but it happens less frequently than in the case of Power and Vulnerable States. Therefore, in principle, we can say that:
— Conscious State is mostly at the point—Conscious State,
— and Unconscious State is mostly at the point—Unconscious State.

Now how does this relate to John Beebe’s model?

I think we can make some analogies here. It means:

• To Conscious State, we can assign the following archetypes from John Beebe’s Model:
  — #1. Hero / Heroine,
  — #5. Opposing Personality.
• To Power State (or Strong Self-Esteem State) we can assign the following archetypes from John Beebe’s Model:
  — #2. Father / Mother,
  — #6 Senex / Witch.
• To Vulnerable State (or Soft Self-Esteem State) we can assign the following archetypes from John Beebe’s Model:
  — #3. Puer / Puella,
  — #7. Trickster.
• To Unconscious State we can assign the following archetypes from John Beebe’s Model:
  — #4. Anima / Animus,
  — #8. Demonic Personality.

Now, we can look at diagram above, and we can say that:

• Archetypes #1 and #5 are always within the Conscious Triangle. Archetypes #1 and #5 I have assigned to the Conscious State. And here we have confirmation of this, that in Conscious State we can be in:
  — At the point of Conscious State, which is the point where our Conscious State is. (To this point is always directed to archetype #1).
  — At the points Power our Vulnerable States, that is, from the Conscious State, we can move to the points where there are Power and Vulnerable States. (Archetype #5 is sometimes directed at these points).
• Archetypes #4 and #8 are analogical to archetypes #1 and #5, with the difference that they refer to the Unconscious Triangle. Archetypes #4 and #8 can therefore we can assign to the Unconscious State. And here we have confirmation that we can be in:
  — At the Unconscious State point, which is the point where our Unconscious State is. (The archetype #4 always is directed to this point).
  — In Power or Vulnerable State points, that is, from our Unconscious State, we can move to points where Power or Vulnerable States are. (Archetypes #8 is sometimes directed at these points).
• As for the other archetypes, namely #2, #3, #6, and #7, we can find them in both Conscious and Unconscious Triangles. I assigned these archetypes to Power and Vulnerable States. So, here we have the confirmation that the Power and Vulnerable States are on the border between Conscious and Unconscious Triangle. And from the Power or Vulnerable States, we can move toward both Consciousness and Unconsciousness.

In the above diagrams, we can see that John Beebe defined very specifically the arrangement of individual arrows with archetypes for each type. I mean, among other things, that in John Beebe’s Model, there is no such flexibility of movement as in I assume in the Mandala of Characters.

John Beebe may probably be right that the given types have just such movements tendencies. John Beebe, in Jungian analysis, has so much experience and knowledge that maybe few can compare with him. If anyone can be compared with him at all.

However, I assume that the great John Beebe’s discoveries are just the beginning of what can still be discovered when it comes to the movement of psychic energy in the different psychological state for different personality types. This is one of the reasons why the psyche model that I use in Mandala of Characters shows all possible directions of movement from one psychological state to another.

I hope that in the future, thanks to the development of research on personalities, it will be possible to more precisely define how psychic energy moves for each type. And thanks to this, it will be possible to create more precise personality models.

Overall, however, I am now very happy that the discoveries made by John Beebe partially correspond to the assumptions I made in the Mandala of Characters.

References: