User Tag List

Results 1 to 6 of 6

  1. #1
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,442

    Default Three common ambiguous terms

    Collected the terms that I see represent totally different factors in type, which can cause a lot of confusion.

    common use, Myers, etc. Jung's use
    objective/subjective Thinking/Feeling extraversion/introversion
    concrete/abstract Sensing/iNtuition extraversion/introversion
    conscious/unconscious "primary"/"shadow"
    Sensing/iNtuition
    extraversion/introversion

    Also notable, is "personal" which to writers like Berens/Nardi denotes the introversion of a function, but to writers like Lenore Thomson, it is more associated with Feeling.

    When I used to try to read Jung, and I would see terms like "concrete thinking" or that an introverted function or iNtuition itself references the "unconscious", it made it all the more difficult to understand him, and functions like introverted iNtuition. It's "unsconscious" by virtue of being introverted, by being iNtuition, and to me, being "shadow" (not in the primary four)! But then that made me wonder what it's really like for those who prefer it (where it's supposed to be "conscious"). (I don't think N="unsconsious" is from Jung himself, though I could be wrong; but some other Jungians use that)

    It's for all of these reasons I've tried to come up with less ambiguous terms:
    E: merging with environment; I: splitting from environment; S: tangible; N: conceptual; T: technical; F: humane;
    Pi: stored data; Pe: emergent data. Je: set standards; Ji: variables.

    Anyone else (particularly someone well versed in Jung) recall any more terms like these?
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  2. #2
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    concretism of thinking refers to a thinking that is led by sensations i.e. not differentiated from it:

    Quote Originally Posted by http://www.nyaap.org/jung-lexicon/c
    Concretism
    A way of thinking or feeling that is archaic and undifferentiated, based entirely on perception through sensation. (Compare abstraction.)

    Concretism as a way of mental functioning is closely related to the more general concept of participation mystique. Concrete thinking and feeling are attuned to and bound by physiological stimuli and material facts. Such an orientation is valuable in the recognition of outer reality, but deficient in how it is interpreted.

    "Concretism results in a projection of . . . inner factors into the objective data and produces an almost superstitious veneration of mere facts."["Definitions," CW 6, par. 699.]

    "[Concrete thinking] has no detached independence but clings to material phenomena. It rises at most to the level of analogy. Primitive feeling is equally bound to material phenomena. Both of them depend on sensation and are only slight differentiated from it. Concret-ism, therefore, is an archaism. The magical influence of the fetish is not experienced as a subjective state of feeling, but sensed as a magical effect. That is concretistic feeling. The primitive does not experience the idea of the divinity as a subjective content; for him the sacred tree is the abode of the god, or even the god himself. That is concretistic thinking. In civilized man, concretistic thinking consists in the inability to conceive of anything except immediately obvious facts transmitted by the senses, or in the inability to discriminate between subjective feeling and the sensed object."[Ibid., par. 697.]

    here is another quote from psychological types description of Te that might clarify this idea of concretism and how it relates to Ti aswell(i obviously added the (Ti) and (Te) in order to clarify):

    It is no proof of its extraverted nature that it is preoccupied with concrete objects, since I may be engaging my thoughts with a concrete object, either because I am abstracting my thought from it(Ti) or because I am concretizing my thought with it(Te). Even if I engage my thinking with concrete things, and to that extent could be described as extraverted, it yet remains both questionable and characteristic as regards the direction my thinking will take; namely, whether in its further course it leads back again to objective data, external facts, and generally accepted ideas, or not.
    but as jung mentioned in that quote Te is more than just concretism of thinking, concretism of Te is just the perceived "external facts" part and there is also the "generally accepted ideas" etc to it.

    abstraction on the other hand jung saw as introverted movement of libido:

    Abstraction is an activity pertaining to the psychological functions in general. There is an abstract thinking, just as there is abstract feeling, sensation, and intuition. Abstract thinking singles out the rational, logical qualities of a given content from its intellectually irrelevant components. Abstract feeling does the same with a content characterized by its feeling-values . . . . Abstract sensation would be aesthetic as opposed to sensuous sensation, and abstract intuition would be symbolic as opposed to fantastic intuition.["Definitions," CW 6, par. 678.]


    what comes to that I/E unconscious/conscious thing, that also doesent go exactly as you mentioned and is far more complex(pun intended :P ). you see introverted functions arent unconscious, they require abstraction, which is a conscious process itself, however how the abstractions are made(which is left out and which is not) is based on complexes(which are the structures of personal unconscious). but that is not to say that its unconscious process, its about pulling relevant things from complexes to consciousness. might sound a bit confusing since im trying to put so much stuff in few words, but hopefully this gives at least some understanding on the subject.


    intuition also is not unconscious entirely, its just the process of creating intuitions which is unconscious, but the "answer" comes to consciousness.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  3. #3
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,442

    Default

    So “concrete Thinking” is basically what is represented by ST, then? Or by “sensation” does he mean a more general sense, where we all have sensation, whether we prefer sensation as a function or not? (Like undifferentiated functions were described to me as being tied to the limbic system where they are experienced “concretely” meaning felt emotionally).

    Now, “participation mystique” involves merging the subject with the object. Isn't that what we established extraversion really was.

    I'm seeing here how this can easily be confused with extraversion of a function (and especially Sensing), singe it so relies on the objective world (like what he said regarding divinity).

    Also, what you say about the abstraction process being connected to [unconscious] complexes also sounds like it's related in some way to the description of “concretism”.
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

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

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric B View Post
    So “concrete Thinking” is basically what is represented by ST, then? Or by “sensation” does he mean a more general sense, where we all have sensation, whether we prefer sensation as a function or not? (Like undifferentiated functions were described to me as being tied to the limbic system where they are experienced “concretely” meaning felt emotionally).

    Now, “participation mystique” involves merging the subject with the object. Isn't that what we established extraversion really was.

    I'm seeing here how this can easily be confused with extraversion of a function (and especially Sensing), singe it so relies on the objective world (like what he said regarding divinity).

    Also, what you say about the abstraction process being connected to [unconscious] complexes also sounds like it's related in some way to the description of “concretism”.
    Nah its not just represented by ST, its just thinking that is derived from sensory information, that can happen to NT or NF or what ever aswell.

    Nope participation mystique isnt about extraversion only and not all extraversion is about it. You really need to study Jungs work other than just typology in order to properly understand his typology. Its more about a state when the external object and inner subject is not differentiated and the term doesent refer to typology only, for example transference is about participation mystique.

    Abstraction is about removing the irrelevant and thus going towards the subjective and towards archetype(as personal complexes are built on top of the archetypes). Concretism on the other hand is just when thinking or feeling is based on sensory stimuli, as jung said, that can be about abstracting thoughts/feelings from the sensory stimuli or concretizing(sort of like actualizing) thoughts/feelings on the sensory stimuli.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #5
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,442

    Default

    Still trying to digest this, but what I'm beginning to grasp is:
    "The primitive does not experience the idea of the divinity as a subjective content; for him the sacred tree is the abode of the god, or even the god himself. That is concretistic thinking. In civilized man, concretistic thinking consists in the inability to conceive of anything except immediately obvious facts transmitted by the senses, or in the inability to discriminate between subjective feeling and the sensed object."

    I know I've been struggling with the idea that God is ultimately an inner experience. I expect it to be external, because the way He's portrayed in religion is external. But then, on one hand, they tell you you must "submit" to this external authority, and He's so evident (from "nature", "Design", etc.) that there's "no excuse". (And many have all these "external" claims such as "healings", "tongues", etc. they put out as ultimate "proofs"). But on the other hand, when you press them on proving it (or like how to attain those supernatural experiences), it's "just faith" (through "prayer" and "devotion", and keeping at it), which is of course internal.
    (And then, I've had people tell me I was being too "black and white" in my counter-arguments, but what does traditional mainstream Christianity thrive off of but black and white pronouncements of doctrine and morality. Go figure!)

    But precisely because of how Christianity was completely fractured, because people projected their inner experience out on this God, and they first tried mandating it through a single hierarchical system, then that became corrupt and people broke away from it, and eventually, everyone just went with their own inner "conviction", and now there's thousands of movements; it seems the "inner" was just leads to confusion.

    So is this an example of the "concretist" thinking?
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

  6. #6
    ⒺⓉⒷ Eric B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    548 sp/sx
    Socionics
    INTj
    Posts
    3,442

    Default

    Still trying to understand this stuff.
    So I'm seeing that both "abstraction" and "subjective" are used for both the introversion of a function, and the differentiation of a function (in any attitude) by the ego (e.g. "Abstraction is an activity belonging to psychological functions in general") as opposed to an undifferentiated function's entanglement with objects (i.e. through sensation).

    If so, then this seems to be where the confusion is coming from (Also seeing the earlier discussions on this:
    http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive...entages-3.html
    http://personalitycafe.com/cognitive...ges-etc-2.html
    http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?p=2246884

    Does Jung ever say what they causes and solutions to concretism are?
    APS Profile: Inclusion: e/w=1/6 (Supine) |Control: e/w=7/3 (Choleric) |Affection: e/w=1/9 (Supine)
    Ti 54.3 | Ne 47.3 | Si 37.8 | Fe 17.7 | Te 22.5 | Ni 13.4 | Se 18.9 | Fi 27.9

    Temperament (APS) from scratch -- MBTI Type from scratch
    Type Ideas

Similar Threads

  1. Three Changes
    By Haight in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 11-01-2010, 11:21 PM
  2. Top three people you'd like to meet from MBTIc
    By rhinosaur in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 153
    Last Post: 02-04-2009, 10:13 PM
  3. Commonly abused logical Fallacies..
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-27-2007, 05:54 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