• 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.

Jung on Rationality and The Unconscious Self

W

WALMART

Guest
"In this broad belt of unconsciousness, which is immune to conscious criticism and control, we stand defenseless, open to all kinds of influences and psychic infections. As with all dangers, we can guard against the risk of psychic infection only when we know what is attacking us, and how, where and when the attack will come. Since self-knowledge is a matter of getting to know the individual facts, theories help very little in this respect. For the more a theory lays claim to universal validity, the less capable it is of doing justice to the individual facts. Any theory based on experience is necessarily statistical; that is to say, it formulates an ideal average which abolishes all exceptions at either end of the scale and replaces them by an abstract mean. This mean is quite valid, though it need not necessarily occur in reality. Despite this it figures in the theory as an unassailable fundamental fact. The exceptions at either extreme, though equally factual, do not appear in the final result at all, since they cancer each other out. If, for instance, I determine the average weight of each stone in a bed of pebbles and get an average weight of 145 grams, this tells me very little about the real nature of the pebbles. Anyone who thought, on the basis of these findings, that he could pick up a pebble of 145 grams at the first try would be in for a serious disappointment. Indeed, it might well happen that however long he searched he would not find a single pebble weighing exactly 145 grams.

The statistical method shows the facts in the light of the ideal average but does not give us a picture of their empirical reality. While reflecting an indisputable aspect of reality, it can falsify the actual truth in a most misleading way. This is particularly true of the theories which are based on statistics. The distinctive thing about real facts, however, is their individuality. Not to put too fine a point on it, one could say that the real picture consists of nothing but exceptions to the rule, and that, in consequence, absolute reality has predominantly the character of irregularity."


How, then, is one to keep the unconscious self from pitting? Preemptive rationality, or permissive observation?
 

RaptorWizard

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,895
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w6
Instinctual Variant
sx/so
Rationality is a very difficult concept to completely map out. Much of it seems to involve the integration of many different dimensions and perspectives, even subjective ones and not just logical ones. Having a holistic view one could say is more rational than a purely mechanical view, since it can account for a greater overall understanding of everything, can give us an advanced vision.
 

Cellmold

Wake, See, Sing, Dance
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
6,266
I think his notion of the warping of statistics in relation to individual reality is a point worth noting.

MBTI in particular has a tendency to fall for this trap quite often, not just in statistics but in the way it presents static blocks for understanding personality. Whereas personality actually flows.
 
B

brainheart

Guest
I think his notion of the warping of statistics in relation to individual reality is a point worth noting.

MBTI in particular has a tendency to fall for this trap quite often, not just in statistics but in the way it presents static blocks for understanding personality. Whereas personality actually flows.

Yes, that's exactly what turned me off from MBTI. I think MBTI turned into something that wasn't Jung's intent. In many ways it reminds me of his description of what happens when extroverted thinking takes over. Many seem to want (with MBTI) everyone to fit a certain type precisely and to be essentially standardized, as if you could measure a person's personality like you can measure the width of a table.
 
Top