User Tag List

First 22303132333442 Last

Results 311 to 320 of 456

  1. #311
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal12345 View Post
    You yourself have had things to say about it and you're not even an acquaintance.

    /thread
    Yes i had, i said things that his acquaintances and himself said. But what do you say? Something that conflicts with what people who know their shit say..
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  2. #312
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    I never seen anything about him being TiNiSeFe, thats not even how he viewed function stacks in psychological types..
    You've "never seen anything" like that because you didn't bother reading my linked post.

    And don't miss my two-post extravaganza on the auxiliary function (also linked to in the first linked post) if you want to understand why the great majority of Jung scholars (as Myers acknowedged) agree that Jung thought the auxiliary function had the same attitude as the dominant function.

  3. #313
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Forever_Jung View Post
    I don't know Vic, he was pretty frank about his break with reality in interviews and I believe in his autobiography too: Memories, Dreams and Reflections. I don't think anyone was hiding it.
    Carl Gustav Jung wrote The Red Book also known as Liber Novus between 1914 and 1930. And in order to preserve Carl Jung's reputation as New Age guru, The Red Book was kept in a secret locked safe and only published in 2009.

    The devotees of the guru Jung have been trying to preserve his reputation in the face of -

    1. his sexual abuse of female patients

    2. his father fixation on the Fuhrer

    3. Jung organised the Deutsche Allgemeine Ärztliche Gesellschaft für Psychotherapie which took its orders from Hermann Goering, who was a Nazi military leader, Commander of the Luftwaffe, President of the Reichstag, Prime Minister of Prussia, and Hitler's designated successor. Hermann Goering was found guilty of conspiracy to wage war, crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. No mitigating circumstances were found. But Carl Jung got off scot-free.

    4. In his publication the Zentralblatt für Psychotherapie Carl Jung endorsed Nazi positions and and recommended Mein Kampf as a reference manual for German psychotherapists.

    5. And the secret Red Book reveals the psychosis of Carl Gustav Jung.

    But none of this matters to the devotees of Carl Gustav Jung because they have no intellecual or moral integrity.

  4. #314
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    But none of this matters to the devotees of Carl Gustav Jung because they have no intellecual or moral integrity.
    The strengths and flaws of the MBTI are what they are, regardless of what involvement Jung did or didn't have with the Nazis — and I really have no idea to what extent any of the allegations in your post are true.

    The stuff in your post would certainly "matter" to me — to the extent that it was accurate — if I was deciding whether I thought Jung was a good man or a bad man, but I fail to see what its relevance is to someone who's trying to decide if the MBTI is a personality typology that's worth their attention.

    For what it's worth, though, I can't help noting that the Wikipedia article on Jung paints a very different picture than your post on the issue of Jung's views of, and cooperation with, the Nazis.

    Your paragraph 3 refers to the wrong Goering, and your paragraph 4 refers to an article that, according to the Wikipedia article, Jung not only didn't endorse but publicly criticized. The Wikipedia article further explains that Jung resigned from the international body that published the article in 1939 "in the face of energetic German attempts to Nazify [it.]"

    So I dunno, Mole, maybe your own "intellectual or moral integrity" could use some work.

  5. #315
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,536

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    The strengths and flaws of the MBTI are what they are, regardless of what involvement Jung did or didn't have with the Nazis — and I really have no idea to what extent any of the allegations in your post are true.

    The stuff in your post would certainly "matter" to me — to the extent that it was accurate — if I was deciding whether I thought Jung was a good man or a bad man, but I fail to see what its relevance is to someone who's trying to decide if the MBTI is a personality typology that's worth their attention.

    For what it's worth, though, I can't help noting that the Wikipedia article on Jung paints a very different picture than your post on the issue of Jung's views of, and cooperation with, the Nazis.

    Your paragraph #3 refers to the wrong Goering, and your paragraph #4 refers to an article that, according to the Wikipedia article, Jung not only didn't endorse but publicly criticized. The Wikipedia article further explains that Jung resigned from the international body that published the article in 1939 "in the face of energetic German attempts to Nazify [it.]"

    So I dunno, Mole, maybe your own "intellectual or moral integrity" could use some work.
    The reality is that Carl Gustav Jung was bad and mad.

    But bad and mad men have always had their followers.

    Here we are in a position to come to understand the followers.

    Are they themselves bad and mad? The answer is almost always, no.

    Do they dissociate imagination from reality? And the answer is almost always, yes.

    Actually they believe in wish fulfillment - they believe in making their dreams come true - but underneath their dreams lies an ugly reality.

    Who will have the moral courage to look reality in the face?

  6. #316
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Time to speak the truth:

    I think if Jung felt that feeling was his weakness, he was mistaken. I can tell explicitly from his aura, that he was very passionate and warm, and very reliant on his mood in the moment. However if he felt that he was bad at sharing or denoting his feelings, that's perfectly reasonable. A number of people who aren't aware of how vivid their essential Feeling nature comes juxtaposed to their counterparts do, and develop this idea that because they can't relate their feelings easily to other people, because they have interests outside of the world of everyday people-matters that are more obvious than their feeling tones, it isn't for them. I believe Jung, who is wrapped up in various ideas and ambiguities about who he is, like the rest of us are, has come to a similar vein of realization. Imo, every bit of Jung's feeling is obvious and is too explicit and core to his presence, verified as is the core nature of a Feeling type without explanation. I think I could easily persuade Jung of this too, because Feelers need to recognize the cool and calculating attitude of the Logical type who doesn't have the moment-by-moment moving sensitivity and passion driving them, and some need to leave their deep preoccupations to look more closely at themselves in the mirror. Where we truly orient, in logic or in feeling, because it isn't so set in stone. It takes some perception to notice and verify it. In Keirsey Jung would probably be an NT because he's a conceptualizer before a humanist like myself, but he's a hardcore feeling type in his own typology, and in fact have reason to suspect him of bias.

    I think if we can be honest about what a Thinking and Feeling type really look like in reality, and not overattribute ourselves in favoritism towards other's opinions, we can come to a consensus on his type.



    Last edited by 527468; 07-06-2014 at 03:31 PM.

  7. #317
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    You've "never seen anything" like that because you didn't bother reading my linked post.

    And don't miss my two-post extravaganza on the auxiliary function (also linked to in the first linked post) if you want to understand why the great majority of Jung scholars (as Myers acknowedged) agree that Jung thought the auxiliary function had the same attitude as the dominant function.
    I read some of it and have been reading Jung quite a lot. What you said about Ne suddenly turning into Ni because of differentiation is some interpretation of your own.

    Jung himself said that other than dom are in opposite attitude to dom, this is also what MBTI said in the beginning.

    I cant read all your posts, but everywhere i see you saying that his aux is I function, i dont see any evidence for it, just you saying that its what you think he viewed himself as = what you said about it is not backed by any evidence, or even rationale, just what your Ni sees. To me as a rational type, it sounds something like "santa claus is real because he is real because i think he is real"..
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #318
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by polikujm View Post
    Time to speak the truth:

    I think if Jung felt that feeling was his weakness, he was mistaken. I can tell explicitly from his aura, that he was very passionate and warm, and very reliant on his mood in the moment. However if he felt that he was bad at sharing or denoting his feelings, that's perfectly reasonable. A number of people who aren't aware of how vivid their essential Feeling nature comes juxtaposed to their counterparts do, and develop this idea that because they can't relate their feelings easily to other people, because they have interests outside of the world of everyday people-matters that are more obvious than their feeling tones, it isn't for them. I believe Jung, who is wrapped up in various ideas and ambiguities about who he is, like the rest of us are, has come to a similar vein of realization. Imo, every bit of Jung's feeling is obvious and hasn't gone, too explicit and core to his presence, and is verified as is the core nature of a Feeling type without explanation. I think I could easily persuade Jung of this too, because Feelers need to recognize the cool and calculating attitude of the Logical type who doesn't have the moment-by-moment moving sensitivity and passion driving them, and some need to leave their deep preoccupations to look more closely at themselves in the mirror. Where we truly orient, in logic or in feeling, because it isn't so set in stone. It takes some perception to notice and verify it. In Keirsey Jung would probably be an NT because he's a conceptualizer before a humanist like myself, but I believe he's a hardcore feeling type in his own typology, and in fact have reason to suspect him of bias.

    I think if we can be honest about what a Thinking and Feeling type really look like in reality, and not overattribute ourselves in favoritism, we can come to a consensus on his type.



    We dont need to figure out his type on our own, he and his close friend has already said it..

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post

    @ 3:20 his former patient who then became a close friend and one of the most famous jungian analysts says that he is thinking intuitive type = TNSF = INTP in MBTI terms because jung typed himself as introvert. Also if what she says at first confuses between T or N dom, she says moments later that they both have inferior F, which clearly says T dom.

    Also in one interview which i bet everyone has seen, he said that he is introvert and ranked his functions T N S F = INTP in MBTI terms.


    /thread
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #319
    deleted
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    Because we have some wide disagreements, it would benefit to continue scrutinizing this issue which does not end with Jung's own origination simply because he fathered the discovery, but is fully applicable in each of our lives where we may be more capable, and (hope to) surpass authority in our understanding.

  10. #320
    Administrator highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    17,904

    Default

    I think he was an INTP

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

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