User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 50

  1. #11
    Senior Member THEANO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    343

    Default

    I presume your book is 'in the works' as we speak. Although much of what I digested here is interesting, it is rather difficult to read due to the lack of white spaces and its rather dry manner of presentation. Would you share your bibliography here? There are several points I'd love to explore through the original writings you base your text on

  2. #12
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by THEANO View Post
    I presume your book is 'in the works' as we speak. Although much of what I digested here is interesting, it is rather difficult to read due to the lack of white spaces and its rather dry manner of presentation. Would you share your bibliography here? There are several points I'd love to explore through the original writings you base your text on
    Psychological Types by Carl Jung is the only bibliographical work I can cite. My book was more focused on acquisition of new insight about the subject rather than exposition of the works already published on typology.

    (I have used Jung's work for rhetorical purposes, or for the purposes of clarification. I have quoted him where my views were consistent with his, as a way of offering a different way of presenting the same idea to the reader. Or quite simply, by putting it in different words. However, I have not accepted Jung's ideas in a non-critical manner.)
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  3. #13
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    BlueWing,

    Your posts, and books, are not going to be popular unless you start writing with the purpose of communicating with people, rather than sounding technical and accurate. Right now, it wouldn't reach anyone but philosophers, and even then, how many philosophers are interested in a classification system like this? I don't know too many. Lay people are interested, but they don't want to read something that's so dry.

    Good luck,
    Edahn

  4. #14
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    BlueWing,

    Your posts, and books, are not going to be popular unless you start writing with the purpose of communicating with people, rather than sounding technical and accurate. Right now, it wouldn't reach anyone but philosophers, and even then, how many philosophers are interested in a classification system like this? I don't know too many. Lay people are interested, but they don't want to read something that's so dry.

    Good luck,
    Edahn
    Agreed, however, typology, if rightly viewed, is more of an inquiry into human nature than a classification system because it purports to evince the basic patterns of our unconscious predilections.
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  5. #15
    Senior Member ThatsWhatHeSaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    7,233

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    Agreed, however, typology, if rightly viewed, is more of an inquiry into human nature than a classification system because it purports to evince the basic patterns of our unconscious predilections.
    Even if that is the case, it doesn't change much about your writing style and its efficacy. PS, you're still doing it.

    Regarding unconscious predilections, I dunno. I'd agree it does provide some insight into the way people think, but I gain much much more insight by studying psychology (not just personality, but all types) and then practicing using all of it. Sometimes, even, dropping all the frameworks provides bursts of insight. Juggling too many frameworks, MBTI included, can easily distort your perception and make you miss lots of information. Here's a question for you: what is the BEST way to really get to understand how people's minds work? Is it typology or something else? Personally, I think understanding people's fears and needs are the best way of piecing together behavioral and personality patterns.

  6. #16
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Even if that is the case, it doesn't change much about your writing style and its efficacy. PS, you're still doing it.

    Regarding unconscious predilections, I dunno. I'd agree it does provide some insight into the way people think, but I gain much much more insight by studying psychology (not just personality, but all types) and then practicing using all of it. Sometimes, even, dropping all the frameworks provides bursts of insight. Juggling too many frameworks, MBTI included, can easily distort your perception and make you miss lots of information. Here's a question for you: what is the BEST way to really get to understand how people's minds work? Is it typology or something else? Personally, I think understanding people's fears and needs are the best way of piecing together behavioral and personality patterns.
    If we want to understand how the minds of people work, psychology is the field to study as it examines their thought and actions directly, or through empirical investigation.

    This is not the aim of typology. Typology merely evinces the basic unconscious predilections, yet it has very little to comment on regarding what personalities shall be derived from those predilections. Consider the following case, Hitler and Mother Theresa were both dominant Introverted Intuitive types. All that typology could say about this is that they both have a gift for creativity and this likely will manifest one way or the other in their lives. However, how exactly this will manifest has more to do with their extrinsic circumstances and non-typological biological predispositions than with their typological unconscious predispositions.

    Typology is most useful in analysis of one's thought concerning abstract ideas. To be clear, typology does not explain why somebody processes abstract ideas the way that they do, but it may offer basic insight regarding one's unconscious tendencies.

    For instance, if we have an Introverted Thinking philosopher or a scientist, many of his habits of mind are a result of his education and non-typological predispositions. However, what typology will have to say on this matter is as follows; he has a strong unconscious tendency towards dispassionate analysis. His education and his non-typological unconscious predispositions have only specified where this unconscious tendency would lead him. Or in other words, how he would use his Thinking function.

    Hence, once this mathematician has been made aware that his strongest unconscious predispositions was towards logical analysis he perhaps may choose schools of thought that prefer an analytical method rather than a more intuitive method of inquiry into the field of his studies. This should work out for him simply because he is in closer natural affinity with the analytical way of thinking. On that note it is very notable ideas of philosophers and artists have often mirrored the ideas that their unconscious predispositions favored.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------

    In short, typology can evince our instincs towards particular ways of thinking. It is an important subject because unlike psychology, which is primarily concerned with empirical investigation of extrinsic circumstances surrounding the individual, it is concerned with the intrinsic cognitive faculties of the individual which are not as easily influenced by extrinsic circumstances. If one understands typology, one can attain a clear idea regarding the relationship between his unconscious predispositions and extrinsic circumstances and more important how to relate to extrinsic circumstances in a manner favorable to himself.

    Because typology is concerned primarily with one's internal unconscious predispositions, it explores the way the human mind works on a very basic level. In short, it is a rudimentary inquiry into philosophy of mind.

    One last distinction: The difference between philosophy of mind and psychology is primarily concerned with the intrinsic dispositions of the mind of the individual and psychology is concerned primarily with how the individual's mind relates to extrinsic circumstances. A philosopher of mind asks, with my mind in consideration as a thing in itself, how does it tend to function. For instance, if I were at a funeral and I have a tough-minded disposition, would I tend to be calm or anxious. Yet Pscyhology would say, our internal dispositions are not very important, we are chiefly concerned with how we will behave in this situation. A psychologist would maintain that we would be calm or anxious based more on our extrinsic circumstances rather than on our unconscious dispositions. Or quite simply, the psychologist is concerned primarily with how people behave, and not how they think. Typology is in the camp of philosophy of mind.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The definition of psychology is an inquiry into the state of mind of the individual. Because academic psychology is focused very intensely on the extrinsic circumstances, or the output of one's internal mindset, or the aforementioned behavior it is in danger of failing to examine the source of such an output, or one's intrinsic dispositions. Such an examination requires an inquiry into philosophy of mind. As aforementioned, typology is one aspect of elementary philosophy of mind.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chiefly, our concern is not to study psychology as an end in itself, or quite simply ask the questions regarding how the mind of the individual tends to work for the sake of asking it. Our purpose is to have a coherent worldview. What we need is not only psychology, but philosophy of psychology. Philosophy is the endeavor to construct a coherent worldview. Philosophy of psychology is a study that is concerned with integrating psychology into our general worldview.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Academic psychology alone does not suffice to answer the most important questions of philosophy of psychology for two reasons, it fails to acquire many important insights into the field because it refuses to thoroughly examine the intrinsic dispositions of one's mind, and it fails to examine how psychology could be integrated into one's quest to construct a coherent worldview.

    Typology rectifies this problem in two regards; first, because it is rightly regarded as an elementary inquiry into philosophy of mind, it exhorts the psychologist to examine the intrinsic disposition's of the human mind and secondly because the method of typological inquiry is primarily philosophical, it encourages the psychologist to focus on the matters of philosophy of psychology.


    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Here's a question for you: what is the BEST way to really get to understand how people's minds work? Is it typology or something else?.
    There is no need for distinction between typology and psychology, they are part of philosophy of psychology which is the main focus of our inquiry.


    Quote Originally Posted by ThatsWhatHeSaid View Post
    Personally, I think understanding people's fears and needs are the best way of piecing together behavioral and personality patterns.
    That is exactly right. Philosophy of psychology synthesizes empirical investigation of human behavior (academic psychology) and the study of the internal dispositions within the mind of the individual (philosophy of mind).
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

  7. #17
    Senior Member THEANO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Posts
    343

    Default

    oh, boy, reading the exchange between the last two posters is like watching someone speaking in French to someone who is unilingual in Cantonese
    Entertaining (to a point) for the rest of us, but clearly must be frustrating for the Frenchman
    All I know for sure is that I come from a long line of dead people

  8. #18
    Senior Member Qre:us's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    4,909

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    If we want to understand how the minds of people work, psychology is the field to study as it examines their thought and actions directly, or through empirical investigation.

    This is not the aim of typology. Typology merely evinces the basic unconscious predilections, yet it has very little to comment on regarding what personalities shall be derived from those predilections. Consider the following case, Hitler and Mother Theresa were both dominant Introverted Intuitive types. All that typology could say about this is that they both have a gift for creativity and this likely will manifest one way or the other in their lives. However, how exactly this will manifest has more to do with their extrinsic circumstances and non-typological biological predispositions than with their typological unconscious predispositions.
    But, there seems to be an inherent assumption with typology that although we cannot assign an observed behaviour to make a type falsifiable (e.g., of your Mama T & Addy H), it is, however, interestingly easy enough to use behaviour to verify a type. Why this skewness?

    "I am right, and this example proves it so."
    "I am still right regardless of this specific example proving it otherwise"

    ....ehhhhhhhhhhh?

    It's like the impenetrable wall of the Virgin Mary.

  9. #19
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlueWing View Post
    In summary, it should be stated that the Introverted type, the Intuitive and the Thinking type are energized primarily through contemplation. The Extroverted type, Sensing and Feeling primarily through furtherance of passion.
    How do Introversion and Intuition correspond with contemplation while Extroversion and Sensation correspond with passion?
    Would you kindly read my signature?

  10. #20
    Occasional Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    1
    Posts
    4,223

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qre:us View Post
    But, there seems to be an inherent assumption with typology that although we cannot assign an observed behaviour to make a type falsifiable (e.g., of your Mama T & Addy H), it is, however, interestingly easy enough to use behaviour to verify a type. Why this skewness?

    "I am right, and this example proves it so."
    "I am still right regardless of this specific example proving it otherwise"

    ....ehhhhhhhhhhh?

    It's like the impenetrable wall of the Virgin Mary.


    @Blue -- why is intuition considered further from "the will" than sensing?

Similar Threads

  1. Evolution of typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 150
    Last Post: 01-31-2013, 05:33 AM
  2. Principles of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 08-20-2012, 08:20 PM
  3. A Survey of Typology Central
    By Caligula in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 03-29-2010, 11:00 PM
  4. Costrin and BlackCat's super duper typology overview (of doom)
    By BlackCat in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 75
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 10:39 PM
  5. Problems of Typology
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 04-26-2008, 11:12 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO