User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 41

  1. #21
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Ego sees them as opposites, F is opposite of T, S is opposite of N and I is opposite of E. for example INTP would be able to easily see T and N in the ego even tho they are I/E opposites, because they arent opposite judgments, but J and P, so ego doesent try to repress these, instead it represses opposite judgment, Fe. the reason third is not as repressed by ego than fourth, is that aux doesent have so big of a role in ego(ego sees it less of self than dom), so ego doesent try to repress third as much. and because dom(Ti) is so much of ego 'self' it represses its opposite judgment(Fe) to much greater degree.

    Bit naturally this isnt all this simple. because third also works as filter for fourth(like dom to aux), you need to also come conscious of fourth in order to filter it properly. if you dont know what you are filtering, you wont be able to filter it properly. this is why one jungian analyst wrote an essay about third being in the shadow of fourth to journal of analytical psychology.

    This sort of mechanisms on the mind(according to jung) extend even out of typology. for example this reconciling third that emerges the union of the opposites(in typology of dom/inferior) can be seen as transference(sort of projection of patients unconscious towards analyst) in therapy sessions, where the opposites would be the patient and analyst. by analyzing this transference will tell about the patients unconscious and this can help the patient to realize more about the self(which is the goal in analytical psychology)
    So nothing specific about displacement, just generalizations about function analysis.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  2. #22
    failure to thrive AphroditeGoneAwry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    INfj
    Enneagram
    451 sx/so
    Socionics
    ENFj Ni
    Posts
    5,651

    Default

    It's still funny to me how amateur typologists argue function usage with the tert function in the same orientation as the dominant function, when Jung believed himself that it was in the opposite orientation....It is an MBTI concept, adapted, basically blindly imo, by practitioners ever since.

    And where does 'ego' come into play? Typology doesn't address ego directly. INTP, are you inventing this yourself? Not saying it's wrong, just that those Freudian terms weren't, to my mind, really brought into typology and aren't represented by it, strictly speaking. Jung speaks to 'differentiated' and 'undifferentiated' functions, and archetypes.
    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


  3. #23
    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
    So nothing specific about displacement, just generalizations about function analysis.
    I dont think displacement is relevant to functions. you think it is? if so, how?
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  4. #24
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    It's still funny to me how amateur typologists argue function usage with the tert function in the same orientation as the dominant function, when Jung believed himself that it was in the opposite orientation....It is an MBTI concept, adapted, basically blindly imo, by practitioners ever since.

    And where does 'ego' come into play? Typology doesn't address ego directly. INTP, are you inventing this yourself? Not saying it's wrong, just that those Freudian terms weren't, to my mind, really brought into typology and aren't represented by it, strictly speaking. Jung speaks to 'differentiated' and 'undifferentiated' functions, and archetypes.
    Its funny when people say that in MBTI tert is same orientation as dom and jung thought different, when infact its the opposite. in MBTI tert is same orientation as aux and inferior. jung was quite vague about this leaving room for interpretation, in his earlier writing he hints that its same as in MBTI(thats why myers interpreted it that way), but in his later work he pretty much said that its same orientation as dom, still leaving bit for interpration. but the way he explained inferior and tert working together the same way as aux and dom, if you would read(and get) him, it would be pretty obvious. also this concrete function thing makes some people not well educated on the subject misunderstand what he says.

    And when it comes to ego, im speaking about ego as jung defined, not freudian ego and functions have quite alot to do with it, its just that MBTI is lacking all the depth from typology, so its not mentioned in MBTI. ego is as important part of typology than unconscious is. but MBTI rarerily talks even about functions woeking unconsciously, but just talks of undeveloped functions and as if these functions didnt exist because you arent in control over them..

    MBTI is like the easy mode, and you know, you never get good by playing the easy mode, no matter how much you play.

    And no im not making this up, im just talking about this in more depth as jung said it works. also there are much much more to typology than just differentation and archetypes are totally unrelated to jungs typology, they are just part of beebean typology and word archetype in beebean term isnt even the same thing as in jungian psychology
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #25
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    Its funny when people say that in MBTI tert is same orientation as dom and jung thought different, when infact its the opposite. in MBTI tert is same orientation as aux and inferior. jung was quite vague about this leaving room for interpretation, in his earlier writing he hints that its same as in MBTI(thats why myers interpreted it that way), but in his later work he pretty much said that its same orientation as dom, still leaving bit for interpration. but the way he explained inferior and tert working together the same way as aux and dom, if you would read(and get) him, it would be pretty obvious. also this concrete function thing makes some people not well educated on the subject misunderstand what he says.

    And when it comes to ego, im speaking about ego as jung defined, not freudian ego and functions have quite alot to do with it, its just that MBTI is lacking all the depth from typology, so its not mentioned in MBTI. ego is as important part of typology than unconscious is. but MBTI rarerily talks even about functions woeking unconsciously, but just talks of undeveloped functions and as if these functions didnt exist because you arent in control over them..

    MBTI is like the easy mode, and you know, you never get good by playing the easy mode, no matter how much you play.

    And no im not making this up, im just talking about this in more depth as jung said it works. also there are much much more to typology than just differentation and archetypes are totally unrelated to jungs typology, they are just part of beebean typology and word archetype in beebean term isnt even the same thing as in jungian psychology
    Jung doesn't speak of undeveloped functions, at least not in adults. He speaks of undifferentiated functions. But all of our functions are developed, it's just that the unconscious ones take on the archetypal characteristics of unconscious images.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  6. #26
    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
    Jung doesn't speak of undeveloped functions, at least not in adults. He speaks of undifferentiated functions. But all of our functions are developed, it's just that the unconscious ones take on the archetypal characteristics of unconscious images.
    I said MBTI is talking about undeveloped functions..

    What comes to archetypes, its totally different thing than functions. when you are for example projecting from anima, you may project unconscious functions at the same time and to the same target also, so the target might shows projections from both anima and unconscious function at the same time, but you are doing this unconscious function projection even if you arent projecting any archetype with it, so yes it kinda means that your unconscious functions might be affected by archetypes, but they are still totally different things. in analytical psychology no one even mentions typology when talking about archetypal stuff, because its pretty irrelevant to it.

    Archetypes are affecting complexes, which are affecting ego.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #27
    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 INTP View Post
    Its funny when people say that in MBTI tert is same orientation as dom and jung thought different, when infact its the opposite. in MBTI tert is same orientation as aux and inferior. jung was quite vague about this leaving room for interpretation, in his earlier writing he hints that its same as in MBTI(thats why myers interpreted it that way), but in his later work he pretty much said that its same orientation as dom, still leaving bit for interpration. but the way he explained inferior and tert working together the same way as aux and dom, if you would read(and get) him, it would be pretty obvious. also this concrete function thing makes some people not well educated on the subject misunderstand what he says.
    Hmm. I've studied Psychological Types pretty extensively and though he is vague, there are several references to the tert being opposite the dominate. Can you tell me the later work you are referring to?

    And when it comes to ego, im speaking about ego as jung defined, not freudian ego and functions have quite alot to do with it, its just that MBTI is lacking all the depth from typology, so its not mentioned in MBTI. ego is as important part of typology than unconscious is. but MBTI rarerily talks even about functions woeking unconsciously, but just talks of undeveloped functions and as if these functions didnt exist because you arent in control over them..
    I was asking because I've thought a lot about how ego fits in with our personality, especially in terms of whether it falls within the nature vs nurture categories; and its relationship to functions in our minds/physches. Other things like enneagram stacking provide clues as well to our fundamental personality that are lacking in the explanations provided by typology and the study of the ego, etc.

    I need to read more Jung, that's for sure.
    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. #28
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aphrodite-gone-awry View Post
    Hmm. I've studied Psychological Types pretty extensively and though he is vague, there are several references to the tert being opposite the dominate. Can you tell me the later work you are referring to?



    I was asking because I've thought a lot about how ego fits in with our personality, especially in terms of whether it falls within the nature vs nurture categories; and its relationship to functions in our minds/physches. Other things like enneagram stacking provide clues as well to our fundamental personality that are lacking in the explanations provided by typology and the study of the ego, etc.

    I need to read more Jung, that's for sure.
    It is on psychological types, in some of those added lectures/letters/whatevers from later years than the book itself.

    When it comes to ego and personality, its pretty much just about the functions that make up the personality, of which some ego approves and some tries to deny. stability of personality is one of the 5 core functions of ego, it doesent want you to change personality, thats why it might be hard to differentiate functions. how ever in personal unconscious there is complex called persona, which is pertty much what you try to make others see you as. comes from the latin word, meaning mask of an actor. anyways, in some theories of personality, theythink that persona is part of personality, how ever in jungs model they are different things, because jung sees personality coming from the functions and functions habe nothing to do with persona. or well, persona might make you look like different type and relating too much on persona, you might even think that you are this type that you have used to wear as a mask, but its not the persons real personality, its just a mask.

    Edit. added few things.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  9. #29
    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 INTP View Post
    It is on psychological types, in some of those added lectures/letters/whatevers from later years than the book itself.

    When it comes to ego and personality, its pretty much just about the functions that make up the personality. how ever in personal unconscious there is complex called persona, which is pertty much what you try to make others see you as. comes from the latin word, meaning mask of an actor. anyways, in some theories of personality, theythink that persona is part of personality, how ever in jungs model they are different things, because jung sees personality coming from the functions and functions habe nothing to do with persona. or well, persona might make you look like different type and relating too much on persona, you might even think that you are this type that you have used to wear as a mask, but its not the persons real personality, its just a mask.
    I think the tert tends to orient more for most people in healthy states in the opposite attitude from the dominant...I think Jung had it 'right' from the beginning, if what you say is true and he changed his stance later. I do think neurotic conditions are more likely to arise when the tert is in the same attitude of the dominant......I started a thread about it all a while back.


    Yeah, I saw that about the 'persona', one his his archetypes, right? I'm trying to discern for myself the core personality of a person, and what makes up that core personality. And where the ego and other facets of personality fall in relation to our core, or innate, being. I think our core personality is comprised other factors besides cognitive functions, though I haven't quite figured out how to define them or describe them, or even what 'they' are.

    Do you think cognitive functions can adequately describe a person's innate personality?
    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


  10. #30
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,010

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    I said MBTI is talking about undeveloped functions..
    Hm, yes, crazy MBTI.

    Quote Originally Posted by INTP View Post
    What comes to archetypes, its totally different thing than functions. when you are for example projecting from anima, you may project unconscious functions at the same time and to the same target also, so the target might shows projections from both anima and unconscious function at the same time, but you are doing this unconscious function projection even if you arent projecting any archetype with it, so yes it kinda means that your unconscious functions might be affected by archetypes, but they are still totally different things. in analytical psychology no one even mentions typology when talking about archetypal stuff, because its pretty irrelevant to it.

    Archetypes are affecting complexes, which are affecting ego.
    Ego creates complexes on the basis of primitive archetypes and then defends these complexes against anxiety-inducing experiences such that the psychological outcome is more pleasant than the anxiety, and yet the complex remains in place. One of these defense mechanisms is displacement. The cognitive process that created displacement in the first place no longer exists, it doesn't have to, and so it goes into the unconscious where it resides with the archetype, such as the image of a father or father-figure.

    But the cognitive process itself was the product of functions. For example, if one is psychologically replacing someone with a father-figure, then originally this involved the Si function.
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] Functions of Type – Activities To Develop The Eight Jungian Functions
    By highlander in forum Typology and Psychology Book Reviews
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-15-2014, 12:24 AM
  2. [ENFP] ENFP Jungian functions information
    By IceBlock in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-23-2012, 05:41 AM
  3. MBTI and Jungian functions
    By hommefatal in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 06-25-2009, 09:52 AM
  4. Jungian functions and the brain
    By TaylorS in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 10-02-2008, 02:24 PM
  5. Emotional "Controllers" using Jungian Functions
    By ygolo in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 04-30-2008, 06:52 AM

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