• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

What MBTI type was Carl Jung

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Actually, based on his writings he is most likely an INFJ. Too lazy to explain why more than everything he wrote always had such an Ni perspective and focus.

It's not just that, Jung's entire life was influenced by Ni. His biography is far more illuminating and relevant than his writing style.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
As this is just the usual this-is-just-the-usual-x-argument argument.

All you have to do is show me your theory of how writing style can be used to determine type...

Didn't think so.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
It's just the usual "argument from writing style."

And I think all you're doing is the typical Ti-dom move of writing something off without giving it a proper listen.

Ti-Ni looping ISTP wouldnt say that he isnt good with sensation and always had good intuition

Why?

An INTJ in an NiFi loop might say he's bad with objectively thinking but always been good with his own personal feelings about things.

I've also seen it claimed in enough places to believe the claim to be true that he originally typed himself ISTP.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Why?

An INTJ in an NiFi loop might say he's bad with objectively thinking but always been good with his own personal feelings about things.

I've also seen it claimed in enough places to believe the claim to be true that he originally typed himself ISTP.

these loops are something situational and not things that last from early childhood to adulthood.

this ISTP argument comes from when jung said something along in the lines that "as a scientist i use thinking and sensation foremost". but thats pretty obvious because making scientific observations you kinda need to look at what is, make logical observations about it and not get carried away with intuitive ideas too much. INTPs are perfectly capable of using what jung called concrete thinking, it means thinking led by sensation, INTPs do this by abstracting from sensations via thinking. this is what any good scientist needs to be doing foremost.
 

Nicki

Retired
Joined
Jun 26, 2010
Messages
1,505
Ti-Ni looping ISTP wouldnt say that he isnt good with sensation and always had good intuition

He also said he was a sensation type. He's either INTP or ISTP. Definitely not an Ni dom. His feeling function was inferior. Everything he wrote was pure Ti.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
He also said he was a sensation type. He's either INTP or ISTP. Definitely not an Ni dom. His feeling function was inferior. Everything he wrote was pure Ti.

from what i said on post above:

"this ISTP argument comes from when jung said something along in the lines that "as a scientist i use thinking and sensation foremost". but thats pretty obvious because making scientific observations you kinda need to look at what is, make logical observations about it and not get carried away with intuitive ideas too much. INTPs are perfectly capable of using what jung called concrete thinking, it means thinking led by sensation, INTPs do this by abstracting from sensations via thinking. this is what any good scientist needs to be doing foremost."
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
these loops are something situational and not things that last from early childhood to adulthood.

If one was absurdly introverted, I don't see why it's not a possibility it could be one's dominant mode of cognition throughout life.

this ISTP argument comes from when jung said something along in the lines that "as a scientist i use thinking and sensation foremost". but thats pretty obvious because making scientific observations you kinda need to look at what is, make logical observations about it and not get carried away with intuitive ideas too much. INTPs are perfectly capable of using what jung called concrete thinking, it means thinking led by sensation, INTPs do this by abstracting from sensations via thinking. this is what any good scientist needs to be doing foremost.

Noted.

If that's the only place it comes from (which I'm not sure it is), then that's a reasonable explanation.

It still doesn't discount the possibility that he's a type other than INTP, though.

In fact, that argument serves to discount in determining his type any time he mentions what functions he uses, including in the Freeman interview.

And, frankly, no one has come close to dealing with what I originally brought up in this post: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50838&p=1685476&viewfull=1#post1685476

All of the arguments since have essentially been footnotes to what I wrote in that post.

And much of what I cover there hasn't even been dealt with/touched upon.
 

Entropic

New member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
1,200
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
He also said he was a sensation type. He's either INTP or ISTP. Definitely not an Ni dom. His feeling function was inferior. Everything he wrote was pure Ti.

these loops are something situational and not things that last from early childhood to adulthood.

this ISTP argument comes from when jung said something along in the lines that "as a scientist i use thinking and sensation foremost". but thats pretty obvious because making scientific observations you kinda need to look at what is, make logical observations about it and not get carried away with intuitive ideas too much. INTPs are perfectly capable of using what jung called concrete thinking, it means thinking led by sensation, INTPs do this by abstracting from sensations via thinking. this is what any good scientist needs to be doing foremost.

And it's comments like these that really make me wonder if you have actually read Jung and understood the deeper parts of his cognition when reading him. The Fe perspective in his writing is extremely obvious, a little too obvious for a proclaimed Ti type. There are plenty of comments he's made when he mocks thinkers. Kind of strange if he considers himself to be Ti dominant. He also dislikes defining his work more than he absolutely has to, and he also tends to aim snide comments and remarks towards sensors.

Just because Jung thinks he was X doesn't mean he is X. He's not perfect when it comes to self-awareness either.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
these loops are something situational and not things that last from early childhood to adulthood.

this ISTP argument comes from when jung said something along in the lines that "as a scientist i use thinking and sensation foremost". but thats pretty obvious because making scientific observations you kinda need to look at what is, make logical observations about it and not get carried away with intuitive ideas too much. INTPs are perfectly capable of using what jung called concrete thinking, it means thinking led by sensation, INTPs do this by abstracting from sensations via thinking. this is what any good scientist needs to be doing foremost.

Exactly. Jung was not speaking to type at all, but only, as you constantly do, to physiological sensation.

How could Jung be stupid enough to confuse physiological sensation with the Sensing function?
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
If one was absurdly introverted, I don't see why it's not a possibility it could be one's dominant mode of cognition throughout life.



Noted.

If that's the only place it comes from (which I'm not sure it is), then that's a reasonable explanation.

It still doesn't discount the possibility that he's a type other than INTP, though.

In fact, that argument serves to discount in determining his type any time he mentions what functions he uses, including in the Freeman interview.

And, frankly, no one has come close to dealing with what I originally brought up in this post: http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=50838&p=1685476&viewfull=1#post1685476

All of the arguments since have essentially been footnotes to what I wrote in that post.

And much of what I cover there hasn't even been dealt with/touched upon.

you are such a pain in the ass to argue with that ill just pass :D ill just say that he seems INTP to me based on what he writes, how he writes, how he came to the conclusions etc and not just the interview where he said that thing hinting towards INTP. i definitely dont think that he could had been an ISTP, but either Ni dom if he by some miracle werent an INTP.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
you are such a pain in the ass to argue with that ill just pass :D ill just say that he seems INTP to me based on what he writes, how he writes, how he came to the conclusions etc and not just the interview where he said that thing hinting towards INTP. i definitely dont think that he could had been an ISTP, but either Ni dom if he by some miracle werent an INTP.

Where is this theory explaining how to determine type from writing style?
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Exactly. Jung was not speaking to type at all, but only, as you constantly do, to physiological sensation.

How could Jung be stupid enough to confuse physiological sensation with the Sensing function?

sensing function is a function that takes in physiological stimuli, i.e. physiological sensations. naturally when the sensation is I or E, it has some differences, but the main point is that it is physiological sensation.

"Sensation, or sensing, is that psychological function which transmits a physical stimulus to perception. It is, therefore, identical with perception."
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Where is this theory explaining how to determine type from writing style?

who said i have some general theory about that?
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
And it's comments like these that really make me wonder if you have actually read Jung and understood the deeper parts of his cognition when reading him. The Fe perspective in his writing is extremely obvious, a little too obvious for a proclaimed Ti type. There are plenty of comments he's made when he mocks thinkers. Kind of strange if he considers himself to be Ti dominant. He also dislikes defining his work more than he absolutely has to, and he also tends to aim snide comments and remarks towards sensors.

Just because Jung thinks he was X doesn't mean he is X. He's not perfect when it comes to self-awareness either.

replies like yours make me go wtf
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
sensing function is a function that takes in physiological stimuli, i.e. physiological sensations. naturally when the sensation is I or E, it has some differences, but the main point is that it is physiological sensation.

"Sensation, or sensing, is that psychological function which transmits a physical stimulus to perception. It is, therefore, identical with perception."

Then we are all sensing types because we have senses.

Meaningless.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
who said i have some general theory about that?

People here are using some amazing theory only known to them by which they can magically determine psychological type merely from reading a couple paragraphs someone wrote.

I'm simply asking - WTF IS THIS THEORY? I really want to know how this magic works.
 

Zarathustra

Let Go Of Your Team
Joined
Oct 31, 2009
Messages
8,110
you are such a pain in the ass to argue with that ill just pass :D

I'll take that as a compliment. :D

ill just say that he seems INTP to me based on what he writes, how he writes, how he came to the conclusions etc and not just the interview where he said that thing hinting towards INTP. i definitely dont think that he could had been an ISTP, but either Ni dom if he by some miracle werent an INTP.

I think that's a reasonable position.
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
I've noticed a pattern where if an intellectual (who happens to be an introvert) is ever considered as being a possible S type, that ISTP ranks at the top of the list by quite a distance.

Tertiary Ni doesn't seem to me a sufficient explanation for the crazy conceptions generated by Jung and his introspective mind.

I don't see any ENTJs on this forum being called ESTPs because they have tertiary Se, or any ENFPs being called ENTJs because they have tertiary Te and so forth.

So basically my point is, how does tertiary Ni for an ISTP get to be blown up as being so much bigger than the tertiary functions for any other type? I think it's because of the common conception of ISTPs being the "most intellectual" sensing type, but when we take the whole picture into account, the ISTPs just seem more grounded in reality and with what works.
 
Top