User Tag List

First 8161718192028 Last

Results 171 to 180 of 456

  1. #171
    Senior Member ICUP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uumlau View Post
    but even then, INTJs tend to be attracted to archetypal personality systems like astrology, even in spite of evidence against.
    I can't really think of a type where I don't know examples of people who are interested-in and retain beliefs, (religious, spiritual, etc.), that aren't reality-based. Plenty of T's do, of any type, based on evidence of the contrary, and despite the ideas and beliefs having a mystical quality.

    Look at how many T's hold completely unjustified beliefs concerning Christianity, for instance.

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

    (In other words, I think maybe that the spirituality and interests related he was into, etc.... really could apply to any type).
    ISTP 6w5 sx/sp
    6-8-4/6-9-4 Tritype

  2. #172
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    You forgot that he said that he had definite problems with feeling = hes wasnt F aux or dom = not an INFJ.
    Third-hand data is unreliable. Everyone has 'problems with feeling.'

    Its funny that people dont even have any knowledge about the subject, still make assumptions of it and are certain they are right about it lol..
    you're losing credibility..quickly. *reads latest posts*. Please rethink your entire understanding.

  3. #173
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    Third-hand data is unreliable. Everyone has 'problems with feeling.'



    you're losing credibility..quickly.
    Third hand data? its jung himself saying that on the video, look up the post #2 in this topic..
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  4. #174
    Probably Most Brilliant Craft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w7 sx/so
    Socionics
    N/A
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Third hand data? its jung himself saying that on the video, look up the post #2 in this topic..
    1. It is a claim. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
    2. 'Feeling' is contextually dependent.

  5. #175
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    1. It is a claim. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
    2. 'Feeling' is contextually dependent.
    Its not a claim that he said he had definite difficulties with feeling or that he was characterized by thinking from early childhood on. also its not a claim of mine that in early childhood you are characterized by you dom function, its something that jung claims.

    Feeling might be contextually dependant, but jung is talking about typology here, so feeling in the context he is using it refers to the feeling function.

    What i did there was explain what jung means by using his definitions and ideas of typology. not what i think being characteristic by from early childhood on..

    This would be obvious to you if you knew about his typology and his point of view on development of type. but instead you are arguing about this, why?
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  6. #176
    Senior Member ICUP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,793

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Craft View Post
    I have to admit, I don't have faith in any of the resources, thus far. It's pretty much all heresay to me. Especially since it has all either been translated, it's a video of an interview with one guy, and it's notes from a seminar. Either of these, of course, can be tampered with in many ways, and probably have been. That's why I don't spend too much time trying to prove anything, or considering.

    One argument is as good as the next in this scenario. In order to argue, one has to assume that the resources are evidence, and have faith that they are true. I do not. That's pretty much why it's easy not to care either way. It's also the reason why I didn't care whether my arguments hold water or not. None of them do, in my mind. It's all done in fun and games.
    ISTP 6w5 sx/sp
    6-8-4/6-9-4 Tritype

  7. #177
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    I'm saying that, based on the premise that he actually told Stephen Abrams on Dec. 18th, 1959 at his house in Kusnacht, Switzerland, that he was an introverted intuitive, then I think he was an INFJ over an INTJ, because I definitely sense the presence of heavy Ti-usage in him, and heavy Ti-usage is far more likely to develop in an INFJ than it was in an INTJ (more on this later).
    So, he would have been 84 years old when he said that. In P.T. it doesn't sound like he thinks he's a dominant irrational at all, and he was in his 40's then. With individuation (not necessarily in Jungian terms), and advancing age, it is not unlikely he felt like an introverted intuitive. But having it come so late in life, one has to question its validity, I think.




    What you'd like to call "abstruse" here, I would call nuance, subtlety, and accuracy. Similarly, I'd call your attempt to call this line of thinking "abstruse" a misunderstanding derived from lack of adequate knowledge.
    I have enough knowledge to know that the more variables you add in the mix, the more questionable your conclusions are likely to be.


    Why not?
    Because if we are genetically predisposed to be a certain type, and he was supposed to be an INFJ, and he did in fact develop a healthy dominant Ni (which is suspect using your theory because it sounds like his life was pretty hard from the get-go....not just later. I mean his mother had already lost 3 children, so she was pretty 'checked-out' [referring to your article] when he was born. Why would he have developed a healthy Ni to begin with?), why would he not just introvert his aux Fe into Fi?

    Yes, I know you argue tertiary temptation, but I do not share your zeal for that hypothesis. I think it more likely that at a young age, his Feeling would have just become introverted. And I think we all agree: He isn't very F.


    No, that's the entire point of tertiary temptation.

    It's the escape hatch for MBTI that allows it to posit just 16 types.

    The point is that, if you develop two functions of the same attitudinal orientation (i.e., both introverted, or both extroverted) first, the second one is not actually your auxiliary, it is your tertiary. If you were to be developing healthily, you would instead be developing a function of opposite attitudinal orientation to these two functions, based on the two functions you are developing actually being your dominant and your tertiary.
    You might remember (or not) that I do not even necessarily agree with the tert being in the same orientation of the dominant. And if it is, I definitely think it's very fluid, and likely to flip places with it's other side. So, again, tert temp just doesn't hold water with me. It's all too hypothetical.


    As you can see in my original post, I think there's a lot of reasons to think he was an Ni-user, including his pronounced mysticism, spirituality, and supposed clairvoyant visions of the future. Actually, along this line of thought, you never responded to what I wrote earlier in this post (largely to you):
    Sorry, unless you quote me directly, I might not see it...But, yeah, I agree he has some Ni. But not dominant amounts of it. And, yeah, (i don't know where it went) but I agree with you about him saying he 'knows god exists,' or whatever, does sound very Ni.....but people get intense about God, so that doesn't stand for much, does it.

    He could also have some disorders. His childhood sounds sorta sketchy. Who knows what neuroses he could have had that would have made him switch function attitudes around.



    I think you were gone when I started 16 threads, one for each type, to look at the cognitive processes results of people allegedly of each type. The results were really interesting, but, as an Ni-dom, I still stand back, and don't choose whether I believe strongly in the camp that people do normally develop their first two shadow functions, or whether they really only use their four normal functions for the most part, and that people just learn to do similar things that their first two shadow functions are usually known for, but they're actually just utilizing their first two normal functions to do so (@uumlau used to be a believer in the former, but recently said that he's switched over to the latter -- I remain a little more neutral on the matter).

    Wherever the truth may lie: I think the second shadow function is undoubtedly much more difficult to develop than the first (which is not to say it cannot and does not happen), so, in the same line of reasoning as that which I said at the beginning of this post -- that I don't think you'll normally see heavy Ti usage in an INTJ -- I don't think you'll normally see heavy Ni usage in an INTP.
    I missed your experiment. Bummer. But I've thought a lot about this myself. And I've watched the thread regarding people posting their function preferences, albeit with the crappy tests, and I know it was not uncommon for the aux and tert to be utilized in both attitudes.

    I emphatically disagree with the bolded, and have argued my stance previously on this forum, mainly in the function thread I started (i think it was in that thread) last year.

    The Dominant is just that: Dominant. It is the first line function people use from birth, theoretically. It is therefore going to be more 'set in stone,' if you will, than any other function; a person is not going to easily switch in that.

    I DO believe the tertiary shadow is more likely to develop before the aux shadow for the same reason, because the aux is more dominant and is not going to switch easily, in normal development, though the original attitude and 'shadow' of the tertiary function are going to be up for grabs depending on the person's environment (see below for more about environment).

    In abnormal development, which likely occurred given Jung's childhood, I believe you have a revert of the aux because the person is introverting so much that it supersedes the normally opposite attitude of the aux, bending it to the will of the Dominant introversion.

    So, I believe a person will actually use their tert function in both attitudes much more easily than changing their dom/aux pair, in normal development.

    Which brings me to the other part of your statement. I really only like to look at the first two functions to type someone. The others are so dependent on a person developing 'normally' anyway. That is where typology gets interesting, and why I not only do not buy into the function layouts proposed by modern-day 'experts' but why I don't believe much in tertiary temptation, etc. After 16 years of age, who knows what functions in what attitudes will be developed? I think it really depends on a person's environment at that point, and contributes to there being so much variation in the set types.


    I think there should be a poll added: What is Jung's primary function? And see what others think...

    I think you are right that he uses Ni, just not as much as Ti. I don't discuss Ne much because I don't understand it very well.




    To Uumlau: I hear and understand your excessive condescension and pedantry, but I fail to see why Jung COULD not be proficient with both attitudes of his aux function. I am referring to you quoting me in a previous post about Ne and Ni.
    Ni/Ti/Fe/Si
    4w5 5w4 1w9
    ~Torah observant, Christ inspired~
    Life Path 11

    The more one loves God, the more it is that having nothing in the world means everything, and the less one loves God, the more it is that having everything in the world means nothing.

    Do not resist an evil person, but to him who strikes you on the one cheek, offer also the other. ~Matthew 5:39

    songofmary.wordpress.com


  8. #178
    Happy Dancer uumlau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    953 sp/so
    Posts
    5,708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AphroditeGoneAwry View Post
    To Uumlau: I hear and understand your excessive condescension and pedantry, but I fail to see why Jung COULD not be proficient with both attitudes of his aux function. I am referring to you quoting me in a previous post about Ne and Ni.
    You heard and understood tones I did not write. When I say "interesting comments," that's exactly what I meant. I take your observation of Jung's impressions of Fe as a valuable data point. It's very useful to know. Not just because it hints at his type, but because it means that I should question his writeup on that function more closely.

    As for the Ne/Ni bit, I now believe they are much more different than they seem. They can look a lot like each other, but after a while, it becomes clear which one is really in play. Ne tends to invoke Si, which sees ideas as a set of concrete entities, which Ne links together. Ni instead views physical reality (Se) as concrete, and instead shuffles ideas internally to build models of reality. The difference becomes most apparent when arguing ideas between Ne and Ni: Ne/Si looks to nail down definitions, to be very clear even as one acknowledges one cannot be completely clear. Ni/Se looks to nail down functionality, how things work dynamically. These two types of reasoning can still end up at the same conclusions, but their paths are very different, such that those of differing types will often strongly criticize the other's methodologies and reasoning (due to the crosstalk).

    I don't think it's possible to be proficient with both attitudes of any function, though it is possible to develop skills such that one can easily accomplish those things associated with the opposite attitude. I consider the functions to indicate one's inner paths of thought, and thus they make certain skills easier than others, but they aren't the skills themselves. One doesn't "do Ni" or "do Fe", rather Ni makes some skills easier, and Fe makes other skills easier.
    An argument is two people sharing their ignorance.

    A discussion is two people sharing their understanding, even when they disagree.

  9. #179
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    I think Jung is INTJ since he mixed empiricism with mysticism though I could be wrong as he actually self identified as ISTP according to CelebrityTypes.

  10. #180
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    I agree with people saying Jung is Ni+Ti in his own system.

    However, in MBTI he is likely INTP because he fits all 4 preferences and the thinker/architect stereotype. MBTI is a personality system not specializing in information metabolism. So as far as organizing MBTI types, it is the cognitive functions that need to be adjusted to fit various examples of INTPs, not Jung's own functions brought over here.

Similar Threads

  1. What MBTI type was Jesus?
    By jixmixfix in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 07-10-2014, 10:44 AM
  2. [NT] Was Carl Jung an NT?
    By INTJ123 in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 143
    Last Post: 11-10-2012, 05:35 PM
  3. What Enneagram Type is Carl Jung?
    By highlander in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 03-15-2012, 09:19 PM
  4. What MBTI type do you think is the hardest to be?
    By OrangeAppled in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 66
    Last Post: 09-02-2010, 02:04 AM
  5. What MBTI type do you think is the EASIEST to be?
    By Such Irony in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 08-27-2010, 09:22 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