• 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.

The Problem With JCF (If You Are Scared Of Change, Don't Read This!)

Julius_Van_Der_Beak

Up the Wolves
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
19,444
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
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?
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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)

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.
 

lunalum

Super Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2008
Messages
2,706
MBTI Type
ZNTP
Enneagram
7w6
Instinctual Variant
sp/so
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.
 

INTP

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


no
 

OrangeAppled

Sugar Hiccup
Joined
Mar 20, 2009
Messages
7,626
MBTI Type
INFP
Enneagram
4w5
Instinctual Variant
sp/sx
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.
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
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)
[MENTION=4660]msg_v2[/MENTION] 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.
 

INTP

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

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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?
 

Entropic

New member
Joined
Aug 20, 2012
Messages
1,200
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
8w9
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
The answer is rather simple - because external behavior does not necessarily correlate with how we think.

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.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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 [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]'s response, even when I quote directly from Jung I'm still "wrong."


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.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
But as you can see from INTP's response, even when I quote directly from Jung I'm still "wrong."

I'm not participating in the thread because I don't have the time to study the discussion in detail, I noticed your comments on an overview. All I see is you guys doing the back-and-forth, but I can't really judge the veracity of the argument right now.

I do have to say (well, I did say), your approach isn't much different, you often assume your argument and that others are tracking you. That's what's either ironic or bewildering. And here you're tossing in Jung to say you're "right," etc. Why should you merely quoting Jung mean anything, either way? It's the argument that matters.

I see she got around to answering my question over night while I was in a drugged up stupor.

She's such an opportunist!
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=4660]msg_v2[/MENTION] 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.

Jung did not say that Te is led by sensation. He said that "that the extraverted intellect, i.e., the mind that is orientated by objective data, is actually the only one recognized [by society]."[430]. Jung stated this in the context of recognizing the existence of the introverted intellect, which is "a kind that is neither orientated by the immediate objective experience nor is it concerned with general and objectively derived ideas." [430]
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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.

That sounds rather impossible, doesn't it? At any rate, I blame modern JCF, which is not original Jungian theory, and its attempt to reduce MBTI types to functions. But they are not based on functions. MBTI types are based on Sensors, not Si or Se; on Intuitives, not Ni or Ne; on Feelers, not Fi or Fe; and on Thinkers, not Ti or Te.

Yes you can have those without their being functions since, for example, thinking is simply a mental process in itself, with the idea of tacking on an I/E attitude an additional feature provided by Jung.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I'm not participating in the thread because I don't have the time to study the discussion in detail, I noticed your comments on an overview. All I see is you guys doing the back-and-forth, but I can't really judge the veracity of the argument right now.

I do have to say (well, I did say), your approach isn't much different, you often assume your argument and that others are tracking you. That's what's either ironic or bewildering. And here you're tossing in Jung to say you're "right," etc. Why should you merely quoting Jung mean anything, either way? It's the argument that matters.



She's such an opportunist!

Yes she is. And you're pretty must just giving a meta-view of the discussion. There must be a little bit of mod left in you. However, I made the time to write that OP while the flu was kicking in for real, even though I desperately wanted not to write it then. Yet you don't have the time to read the discussion in detail.

I thought it might have been something worse than the flu because of chest pain. I haven't had the flu in a long, long time. The family and I got flu shots last September, so there must be some wild strain out there. If it's bird flu I'll have to control the urge to start flapping my arms.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
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/

If it's on the internet it must be true, right? Why don't you quote directly from Jung, the founder of all this, stating that archetypes are structures? Because the quote doesn't exist.


nah you arent too nit-picky, just wrong :D


no

Yes.
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
[MENTION=4660]msg_v2[/MENTION] 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.

You're explaining the quote while contradicting it.

"Extraverted thinking, therefore, need not necessarily be a merely concretistic thinking..." Jung

"Te is concrete, as in being led by sensation..." [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
Jung did not say that Te is led by sensation. He said that "that the extraverted intellect, i.e., the mind that is orientated by objective data, is actually the only one recognized [by society]."[430]. Jung stated this in the context of recognizing the existence of the introverted intellect, which is "a kind that is neither orientated by the immediate objective experience nor is it concerned with general and objectively derived ideas." [430]

"Thinking in general is fed from two sources, firstly from subjective and in the last resort unconscious roots, and secondly from objective data transmitted through sense perceptions.

Extraverted thinking is conditioned in a larger measure by these latter factors than by the former. judgment always presupposes a criterion ; for the extraverted judgment, the valid and determining criterion is the standard taken from objective conditions, no matter whether this be directly represented by an objectively perceptible fact, or expressed in an objective idea ; for an objective idea, even when subjectively sanctioned, is equally external and objective in origin. 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."

The underlined are Te being concrete, but it can also be about objective ideas, like education, tradition etc. but those things are also learned through sensation, so..

But as jung mentions here:

" 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 or because I am concretizing my thought with it. 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."

Ti can be led by sensation aswell, but it abstracts from sensation, which is also concretistic thinking, but is not extraverted thinking as it doesent lead back to the object.

One question, how do you think someone can observe objective evidence if its not through sensation? :huh:
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
You're explaining the quote while contradicting it.

"Extraverted thinking, therefore, need not necessarily be a merely concretistic thinking..." Jung

"Te is concrete, as in being led by sensation..." INTP

im not contradicting what i said, you just dont understand what i said because you clearly dont understand concretism and extraversion of thinking very well
 

INTP

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2009
Messages
7,803
MBTI Type
intp
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx
If it's on the internet it must be true, right? Why don't you quote directly from Jung, the founder of all this, stating that archetypes are structures? Because the quote doesn't exist.




Yes.

john betts is an zürich trained jungian analyst.

i didnt care to go through all books and articles from jung to search one quote(you apparently did, as you claim that the quote doesent exist), so i just looked up a quote which i remember where it is. i suggest you to go learn more jung and it will become obvious to you too. i think most people will see it as obvious that if something is organized and is a part of a bigger system, the organized part can be called a structure within the bigger system. seriously im starting to doubt whether you are an INTP or not, because this sort of logic should come naturally for INTP..
 

Mal12345

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
14,532
MBTI Type
IxTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
"Thinking in general is fed from two sources, firstly from subjective and in the last resort unconscious roots, and secondly from objective data transmitted through sense perceptions.

Extraverted thinking is conditioned in a larger measure by these latter factors than by the former. judgment always presupposes a criterion ; for the extraverted judgment, the valid and determining criterion is the standard taken from objective conditions, no matter whether this be directly represented by an objectively perceptible fact, or expressed in an objective idea ; for an objective idea, even when subjectively sanctioned, is equally external and objective in origin. 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."

The underlined are Te being concrete, but it can also be about objective ideas, like education, tradition etc. but those things are also learned through sensation, so..

And I learned mathematics through sensation. So what? We couldn't get along very well in life without sensation: eyes, ears, nose, skin, tongue. Yours is a non-point that speaks only to normal human physiology.

But as jung mentions here:

" 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 or because I am concretizing my thought with it. 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."

Ti can be led by sensation aswell, but it abstracts from sensation, which is also concretistic thinking, but is not extraverted thinking as it doesent lead back to the object.

One question, how do you think someone can observe objective evidence if its not through sensation? :huh:

As I said, if all you're talking about is physiological sensation, it's a non-point, and it's unworthy of being stated in the same context as Jung's revolutionary theory.
 
Top