User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 89

  1. #41
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,040

    Default


    Do you agree with Jung’s “Rational” versus “Irrational” dichotomy?
    Yes. I think I'm more of a structured type than a spontaneous type, which is what the implication of me being an introverted type is in Jungian theory.

    J and P are not situational. They speak to lifestyle. Based on Jung’s descriptions of the rational and irrational types, perhaps the best way to sum up the difference in their respective lifestyles would be “traditional” versus “non-traditional.” (Of course that tradition depends on cultural milieu.)
    Where does Jung equate it with traditional? Are you using traditional when you mean structured? They aren't the same thing, in my mind. Structures can be unconventional.

    Rational types are not, by definition, fun-loving or spontaneous. But that’s not to say they don’t have their moments, in reality, when they express their fun sides. P and J are designed to be rules, not to point to the exceptions and say “to hell with typology because it’s not an absolute.” A P personality is, as a rule, fun-loving and spontaneous; theoretically, they are so by definition.
    See, I would say I'm more of a judging type than a perceiving type, but I'm not an extroverted thinker. I agree with the socionics description of me as an INTj, or LII.

    Regarding "type as nature", what is it, if not nature? What do we actually mean when we say someone is a certain type, if we are not discussing their nature?
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  2. #42
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    Yes. I think I'm more of a structured type than a spontaneous type, which is what the implication of me being an introverted type is in Jungian theory.



    Where does Jung equate it with traditional? Are you using traditional when you mean structured? They aren't the same thing, in my mind. Structures can be unconventional.
    Study Jung's type descriptions: "Extraverted thinking, therefore, need not necessarily be a merely concretistic thinking ,it may equally well be a purely ideal thinking, if, for instance, it can be shown that the ideas with which it is engaged are to a great extent borrowed from without, i.e. are transmitted by tradition and education."(Psychological Types, 428)

    "the nature of extraverted feeling... has become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object. Even where it seems to show a certain independence of the quality of the concrete object, it is none the less under the spell of traditional or generally valid standards of some sort." (Psychological Types, 446)

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    See, I would say I'm more of a judging type than a perceiving type, but I'm not an extroverted thinker. I agree with the socionics description of me as an INTj, or LII.

    Regarding "type as nature", what is it, if not nature? What do we actually mean when we say someone is a certain type, if we are not discussing their nature?
    Type is by habit. Habit is by nature. What's the use of studying personal growth if type is nature? Nature implies that it can't fundamentally change. Even Jung said that type will change as one ages, and this was regarding the question of his own type. Change your type by changing your habits.
    "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.”

  3. #43
    Tier 1 Member LunaLuminosity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w6 so/sp
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    2,484

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Yes to what, yes to what, and of course yes to what?

    I want to know what you think I wrote that was correct.
    All of it, except for the part where you pin this problem on JCF, when it's actually the opposite.

    Thereby making it all correct and all incorrect at the same time, in a sense.

  4. #44
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Archetypes aren't, strictly speaking, structures. Or am I being too nit-picky?
    Ego is the central operating structure within consciousness, complexes are the structures in personal unconscious and archetypes are the structures of collective unconscious.

    "Archetypes constitute the structure of the collective unconscious - they are psychic innate dispositions to experience and represent basic human behavior and situations." http://www.carl-jung.net/collective_unconscious.html

    "Today we also need to deal with structures. As i said earlier by structures of the psyche, i mean the components or the units that exist within the psyche. In brief, these are the ego, complexes and archetypes... The structure within consciousness is the ego.. Personal unconscious contains complexes.. The structures within the collective unconscious are archetypes." Jung Podcast #2 – Jung’s Model of the Psyche -> http://jungian.ca/resources/jung-podcasts/

    nah you arent too nit-picky, just wrong

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Yes.
    no
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  5. #45
    Sugar Hiccup OrangeAppled's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 sp/sx
    Socionics
    IEI Ni
    Posts
    7,661

    Default

    The problem in the OP, IMO, is viewing functions as traits rather than thought process or mindsets or even EGOS.
    The personality traits used in the MBTI tests are common indicators, not the functions in themselves.

    Also, Pi & Pe are very different. Pi types are described as having an inner spontaneity, but not an outer one. Outside they can look "fruitless" according to Jung. Jung's primary divide for psychological types was the I/E aspect, after all.

    As a Ji-dom, Je is foreign to me. Ji is said to hardly look like the common view of "judging" (Lenore Thompson, I believe). It's not just the
    "Pe face" that does this, but the nature of Ji itself. That is why the person must repress Je in favor of Ji.

    I woud say that the qualities associated with MBTI J types is due to the dynamic of Pi + Je in people, the way they work off each other. The inferior tends to be experienced as something outside the ego, meaning others may see it frequently in you, but it doesn't feel like you to you. You experience it as not yourself or don't like to admit those traits; you try to repress it. This is why Pi types are less likely to type as P in MBTI because P is defined by Pe, using inferior traits they don't "own".

    As for the influence of the tertiary, the reason why it's viewed in terms of loops is because of an idea of balance. However, that Nardi experiment seems to suggest people use their tertiary a lot, so much so they can look almost indistinguishable from their near-opposite type (ie. INTJ & ISFP). This might explain some common mistypings, such as why a lot of ISFPs may mistype as Ns, etc.
    Often a star was waiting for you to notice it. A wave rolled toward you out of the distant past, or as you walked under an open window, a violin yielded itself to your hearing. All this was mission. But could you accomplish it? (Rilke)

    INFP | 4w5 sp/sx | RLUEI - Primary Inquisitive | Tritype is tripe

  6. #46
    Senior Member INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    Study Jung's type descriptions: "Extraverted thinking, therefore, need not necessarily be a merely concretistic thinking ,it may equally well be a purely ideal thinking, if, for instance, it can be shown that the ideas with which it is engaged are to a great extent borrowed from without, i.e. are transmitted by tradition and education."(Psychological Types, 428)

    "the nature of extraverted feeling... has become wholly subordinated to the influence of the object. Even where it seems to show a certain independence of the quality of the concrete object, it is none the less under the spell of traditional or generally valid standards of some sort." (Psychological Types, 446)
    @msg_v2 jung didnt say about traditional. what he is talking there is about facts that are coming from external source. what he is doing there is a differentiation between concretistic thinking that is introverted vs extraverted. Te is concrete, as in being led by sensation, jung is just saying that Ti can also be led by sensation, but the difference between the two is that Te uses objective measures when thinking is led by sensation, but Ti does not.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  7. #47
    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
    I don't think it changes the whole concept; it just applies it to something within the ego of every type connected to the functions; rather than ONLY being a role a single ego can fall into.
    he says many things that are contrary to original definitions and concepts so badly that it changes the whole thing and the two cannot be about the same thing.

    ill use the expansion pack for a game vs rip off of a game example again. lets say you have a barbarian, the original game has made the barbarian in a way that its fundamentally someone who uses brute physical force to kill monsters. now they make an expansion pack and add some skills, those skills follow the original idea that barbarian beats the crap out of monsters with a sword, axe or what ever. now someone else makes a similar game and also puts in barbarian, but their barbarian can do some magic tricks aswell and fly or what ever. that rip off barbarian is fundamentally different from the game it was ripped off from. similarly beebes ideas of the archetypes are fundamentally different from jungs.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung

    Read

  8. #48
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    The point of the OP is to take JCF to task. I think it did so very effectively, and nobody has really agreed or disagreed with it.
    That's probably more that you haven't made your argument clear enough in the details that it can be responded to, although it looks like you and INTP are engaging well enough now. I tried to get enough out of you to have something to actually push against, but it was a laborious process.

    You might have beef with Eric B's style enough to complain about him at length, but you don't really seem to acknowledge how various members have difficulty understanding your arguments -- not because they are profound or over complicated, but simply because you don't really offer the underlying support or paint a clear path of logic for them. You guys are like opposites in that regard, no wonder you find his style annoying. I usually don't have the energy to invest to get enough necessary backfill to follow your reasoning, although in this thread you provided a little more than usual (so thanks for that).

    And when I asked someone what she agreed with about it, I got no response (because she didn't read it).
    Luna? What, did you ask her?
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  9. #49
    Senior Member Entropic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    8w9 sx/so
    Socionics
    ILI Ni
    Posts
    1,199

    Default

    The answer is rather simple - because external behavior does not necessarily correlate with how we think.

    Quote Originally Posted by OrangeAppled View Post
    The problem in the OP, IMO, is viewing functions as traits rather than thought process or mindsets or even EGOS.
    The personality traits used in the MBTI tests are common indicators, not the functions in themselves.
    This I can agree with.


    Also, Pi & Pe are very different. Pi types are described as having an inner spontaneity, but not an outer one. Outside they can look "fruitless" according to Jung. Jung's primary divide for psychological types was the I/E aspect, after all.
    I think I understand what is being referred to here, but I am not sure what is defined by "inner spontaneity".


    I woud say that the qualities associated with MBTI J types is due to the dynamic of Pi + Je in people, the way they work off each other. The inferior tends to be experienced as something outside the ego, meaning others may see it frequently in you, but it doesn't feel like you to you. You experience it as not yourself or don't like to admit those traits; you try to repress it. This is why Pi types are less likely to type as P in MBTI because P is defined by Pe, using inferior traits they don't "own".
    I tend to more frequently type as a perceiver on the MBTI test than I do judger, although the score is usually weakly favoring P. If anything I think a lot of Pi dominant types might type themselves as P on the MBTI since that is what they are, after all. Even though my auxiliary is Te it doesn't appear much outside organizing internal content. However, the main point to make is that I am not leading with Je which is more stereotypically associated with the J letter, Te more so than Fe.


    As for the influence of the tertiary, the reason why it's viewed in terms of loops is because of an idea of balance. However, that Nardi experiment seems to suggest people use their tertiary a lot, so much so they can look almost indistinguishable from their near-opposite type (ie. INTJ & ISFP). This might explain some common mistypings, such as why a lot of ISFPs may mistype as Ns, etc.

    I am not sure it's that simple to be honest, as I think the types Nardi define are far-removed from Jung's understanding of type. Nardi is doing something else than Jung or the MBTI.

    I was waiting for the day you and I would meet.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Youtuber | The Typologist Blog | Redditor | Message me!

  10. #50
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    13,993

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    That's probably more that you haven't made your argument clear enough in the details that it can be responded to, although it looks like you and INTP are engaging well enough now. I tried to get enough out of you to have something to actually push against, but it was a laborious process.

    You might have beef with Eric B's style enough to complain about him at length, but you don't really seem to acknowledge how various members have difficulty understanding your arguments -- not because they are profound or over complicated, but simply because you don't really offer the underlying support or paint a clear path of logic for them. You guys are like opposites in that regard, no wonder you find his style annoying. I usually don't have the energy to invest to get enough necessary backfill to follow your reasoning, although in this thread you provided a little more than usual (so thanks for that).
    But as you can see from @INTP's response, even when I quote directly from Jung I'm still "wrong."


    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    Luna? What, did you ask her?
    I see she got around to answering my question over night while I was in a drugged up stupor.
    "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. Do you see the problem with typing others? Is it worth it?
    By Chancelade in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 01-23-2014, 07:37 PM
  2. Replies: 91
    Last Post: 01-23-2011, 07:49 PM
  3. [MBTItm] ISTj Ultimatum from ENFP-(pref. if you are famaliar with us)
    By NetJunkie2 in forum The SJ Guardhouse (ESFJ, ISFJ, ESTJ, ISTJ)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-24-2010, 02:53 AM
  4. What happens if you are in the middle?
    By Jon_sparky in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-23-2010, 05:54 PM
  5. Replies: 35
    Last Post: 03-15-2010, 10:46 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