User Tag List

First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 149

  1. #61
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    Unfortunately, I can only find chapter 8 online, and Psychological Types seems surprisingly hard for me to come by. Nevertheless, I find your reasoning hard to follow.

    You seem to be arguing that the auxiliary function changes orientation as it becomes more conscious (and note that Jung states that this is a "relatively unconscious" function), and thus the intuition becomes introverted, so the intuition of an INTP is really introverted intuition. This cannot be reconciled with your earlier insinuation that INTPs are Ni dominants, since what you speak of refers to the attitude of an auxiliary function, and the method you used to claim that INTPs have introverted intution was regarding intuiton as an axuillary function. This implies that Thinking is the dominant function.


    Answer this: Would an Introverted Thinker be display the same standards of rationality towards the object, or the external world as an Extraverted Thinker? The only chapter from Jung on this I have been able to read suggests that this would not be the case. Apparently, everything else Jung wrote is in contradiction to the one chapter where he tried to actually articulate this, but I basically have to take your word for it since this book is really hard to find in its entirety.
    Jung referred to introversion as the "conscious attitude" of an introvert — and yes, virtually everyone agrees (because Jung was quite explicit about it) that Jung believed that the second function of an introvert would be extraverted (just like the third and fourth functions) so long as it remained unconscious. But, to the extent that it was differentiated and brought up into consciousness — and Jung thought it was typical for the second function to end up mostly conscious — I and (as Myers acknowledged) the vast majority of Jung scholars believe that Jung thought the auxiliary function would also take on the introvert's "conscious attitude."

    And, as I also explained, and consistent with that majority view, I believe Jung would have said that an introvert who displays the personality characteristics that get you typed P on the official MBTI was a Pi-dom, rather than a Ji-dom whose "P" characteristics reflected an extraverted auxiliary perceiving function. So, faced with a person who would have typed as INTP on the official MBTI, I think Jung would have said that person was an Ni-dom with a Ti auxiliary.

    As for your last question, the attitude of the auxiliary really has nothing to do with what Jung viewed as the differences between introverted thinking and extraverted thinking, and there's nothing in the other chapters of Psychological Types that's fundamentally inconsistent with Jung's descriptions of those two functions in Chapter X. As you may know, and as further discussed in this PerC post, Jung described a Te-dom's thinking as "concretistic," and hence overly tied down by the "facts" and "objective data" at the expense of abstract "interpretation" of the facts. And conversely, and as further described in this PerC post, Jung described Ti-doms as being highly abstract thinkers who, as a result, were prone to be overly dismissive of the facts.

  2. #62
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alea_iacta_est View Post
    It's entirely possible for it to be Ti, I was merely adding a suggestion. Ni is generally perceived (heh) to be the most unconscious and mysterious function that sees the outcome of scenarios, so many people and myself included have hypothesized that Ni is the cause of unconsciously solving a math problem. You would perceive the problem, 17 + 28, but then instantly have the word or image (depending on your thinking style) of the number 45, completely skipping the decision making/judging function to solve the problem logically or step-by-step. It's sort of like looking at 17 + 28 and interpreting it as 45 without any forethought.

    Now what would be extremely interesting would be to see how this unconscious math plays out in a type with both Ti and Ni, specifically the ISTP and the INFJ in a dom-tert loop.
    I have both Ti and Ni and I used to be in such a loop before where Se and Fe were both low. A while ago. Not right now maybe. Anyway, do ask me questions, maybe I can help satisfy your curiosity at least partially. :P

    As for the answer immediately and automatically resulting from the 17 + 28 problem, I simply see it as a result of practice in childhood, resulting in automatic unconscious knowledge*.

    I have a problem with the idea of associating everything automatic with intuition, because you will come to conclusions from that assumption that are simply not true.

    *: See:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_memory
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaticity
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automat...rocesses_(ACP)
    Etc...
    (Wikipedia works for some basic psychology concepts just fine)

  3. #63
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    @valaki

    A lot of the comments and questions in your post make it sound like you're under the impression that I was endorsing most or all of the Jung stuff (and von Franz stuff) I quoted, but I noted that that is decidedly not the case in the last spoiler at the end of my two-part post. I'm not really a functions guy at all.
    In a basic sense, I've been aware of what you wrote about how you don't believe in the functions and some of the jungian stuff.

    What I have not been aware of what you actually believe in then, because often you quote and talk about the quotes at length without questioning the sensibility of the ideas.

    Do you mean that you reject all those ideas? Just simply having fun with analysing and interpreting Jung's writings for historical reasons?

    So, if you don't agree with Jung on the things that I took issue with, then fine, we are on the same page. But I see it as common misconceptions really, so if someone else here does believe in them, I'll be happy to hear why they think it's any good. :p


    You ask for "evidence" that Myers and the official MBTI folks have essentially centered their typology around the dichotomies while mostly just giving what I call "lip service" to the Jungian functions, and I describe a lot of "evidence" for that in that long INTJforum post I linked to. There's really no way all the stuff I describe there — all the way from Gifts Differing through the official MBTI Manuals through the more recent "Step II" personality reports — is consistent with the idea that the MBTI establishment views the cognitive functions as anything remotely approaching the main event when it comes to your MBTI personality. The incredibly sketchy descriptions of type dynamics and the eight functions that you find at the myersbriggs.org site is typical of the lip service I'm talking about. As noted in my linked post, Myers thought the most meaningful division of the 16 types into subgroups was the foursome of NF, NT, SF and ST — each of which consists of four types with four different dominant functions. Both Myers and her official MBTI successors have been actively involved in hundreds of studies over the years, almost all of which have studied and reported the relevant correlations in terms of the dichotomies — and non-function-related combinations like NT and NF — rather than in terms of the cognitive functions.
    I feel you have some bias here. I did say that it might be that the main focus is on the dichotomies but it is simply not true that they did away with the functions. It's all still on their site. When I first read your claim about the functions having been abandoned I took it to mean that they no longer officially endorse them. This is simply not true. So I'm asking you to be more clear on that when talking about this topic.

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    Jung referred to introversion as the "conscious attitude" of an introvert — and yes, virtually everyone agrees (because Jung was quite explicit about it) that Jung believed that the second function of an introvert would be extraverted (just like the third and fourth functions) so long as it remained unconscious. But, to the extent that it was differentiated and brought up into consciousness — and Jung thought it was typical for the second function to end up mostly conscious — I and (as Myers acknowledged) the vast majority of Jung scholars believe that Jung thought the auxiliary function would also take on the introvert's "conscious attitude."

    And, as I also explained, and consistent with that majority view, I believe Jung would have said that an introvert who displays the personality characteristics that get you typed P on the official MBTI was a Pi-dom, rather than a Ji-dom whose "P" characteristics reflected an extraverted auxiliary perceiving function. So, faced with a person who would have typed as INTP on the official MBTI, I think Jung would have said that person was an Ni-dom with a Ti auxiliary.
    Another question; assuming you are discussing all this just for historical reasons, why do we even care about this then? Whatever Jung said was no good so why go into such detail about how to interpret his stuff? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I'm not saying it can't be interesting but what's the point? Does it help some understanding that would actually be useful in the real world?

    It would make more sense if Jung was still alive and we could ask him himself about what he meant and then discuss if it is really so in reality or not. But as things are now, anyone is free to develop their own theories coming from Jung but with some different ideas e.g. that the attitude of the auxiliary is opposite even when in the consciousness. As long as it matches better with reality than Jung's stuff, cool. And btw, that's my experience personally, that is, mine's opposite Doesn't mean it is the same for everyone of course. Of course I don't mean this in any real objective sense either, only as far as we can even interpret functions when observing our own minds.

  5. #65
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by valaki View Post
    Another question; assuming you are discussing all this just for historical reasons, why do we even care about this then? Whatever Jung said was no good so why go into such detail about how to interpret his stuff? That doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I'm not saying it can't be interesting but what's the point? Does it help some understanding that would actually be useful in the real world?

    It would make more sense if Jung was still alive and we could ask him himself about what he meant and then discuss if it is really so in reality or not. But as things are now, anyone is free to develop their own theories coming from Jung but with some different ideas e.g. that the attitude of the auxiliary is opposite even when in the consciousness. As long as it matches better with reality than Jung's stuff, cool. And btw, that's my experience personally, that is, mine's opposite Doesn't mean it is the same for everyone of course. Of course I don't mean this in any real objective sense either, only as far as we can even interpret functions when observing our own minds.
    Since, notwithstanding the many changes and additions Myers made, Psychological Types was the original source for quite a lot of what ended up in the MBTI, and because Jung was a very smart man and had a gift for vivid descriptions (among other virtues), I think Psychological Types is worth reading/pondering by anyone with a substantial interest in the MBTI.

    More importantly, though, from my perspective, it seems to me that there are large numbers of people on internet forums who subscribe to the most popular functions model mostly on the basis of stuff they've read on the internet, and who are often under the impression that that model is more Jungian than it actually is — and sometimes give it more credibility than I think it deserves, at least partly on that basis. So, for me, that's another reason why I think it makes sense to try to promote a better understanding of what Jung actually wrote and the nature of the changes Myers made.

  6. #66
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    SeNi
    Enneagram
    8+7 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SeTi
    Posts
    940

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    Since, notwithstanding the many changes and additions Myers made, Psychological Types was the original source for quite a lot of what ended up in the MBTI, and because Jung was a very smart man and had a gift for vivid descriptions (among other virtues), I think Psychological Types is worth reading/pondering by anyone with a substantial interest in the MBTI.

    More importantly, though, from my perspective, it seems to me that there are large numbers of people on internet forums who subscribe to the most popular functions model mostly on the basis of stuff they've read on the internet, and who are often under the impression that that model is more Jungian than it actually is — and sometimes give it more credibility than I think it deserves, at least partly on that basis. So, for me, that's another reason why I think it makes sense to try to promote a better understanding of what Jung actually wrote and the nature of the changes Myers made.
    Meh it's a silly idea to give more credibility to something just because it comes from whoever :P

    I get your point otherwise - Jung is indeed a nice read I agree on that

  7. #67
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Iron Giant View Post
    So, Ni-doms, can you give examples from your experience that reflects or contradicts Jung's analysis? Do you think you see things very deeply, but in ways that feel impossible to express, and maybe make no practical sense once they're out in the open?
    if you really want to play, here's what you get.

    Ni is like the rosetta stone of the rosetta stones. or, i think it was i who built the tower of babel.

    4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.
    5 And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.
    6 And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
    7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech.
    8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
    9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.
    —Genesis 11:4–9

  8. #68
    Aspie Idealist TaylorS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    972 so/sp
    Socionics
    EII Ni
    Posts
    365

    Default

    Ni was Jung's tertiary function and really only integrated it during his mid-life crisis following his break with Freud. It always came across to him as rather mysterious and magical for that reason. It's insights often struck him in dreams, or when he was, in one example he gives, daydreaming while on a train ride (He had a vision of Europe being literally drowned by a flash-food of blood, a few months later WW1 started).
    Autistic INFP


  9. #69

    Default

    Just to throw this out there, this is Jung's go-to example of a Ni-dom(and an INTJ at that!):

    People with an overdevelopment of intuition which leads them to scorn objective reality, and so finally to a conflict such as I have described above, have usually characteristic dreams. I once had as a patient a girl of the most extraordinary intuitive powers, and she had pushed the thing to such a point that her own body even was unreal to her. Once I asked her half jokingly if she had never noticed that she had a body, and she answered quite seriously that she had not--she bathed herself under a sheet! When she came to me she had ceased even to hear her steps when she walked--she was just floating through the world. Her first dream was that she was sitting on top of a balloon, not even in a balloon, if you please, but on top of one that was high up in the air, and she was leaning over peeping down at me. I had a gun and was shooting at the balloon which I finally brought down. Before she came to me she had been living in a house where she had been impressed with the charming girls. It was a brothel and she had been quite unaware of the fact. This shock brought her to analysis.


    I cannot bring such a case down to a sense of reality through sensation directly, for to the intuitive, facts are mere air; so then, since thinking is her auxiliary function, I begin to reason with her in a very simple way till she becomes willing to strip from the fact the atmosphere she has projected upon it. Suppose I say to her, "Here is a green monkey." Immediately she will say, "No, it is red." Then I say, "A thousand people say this monkey is green, and if you make it red, it is only of your own imagination." The next step is to get her to the point where her feeling and thinking conflict. An intuitive does with her feelings very much the same thing she does with her thoughts; that is, if she gets a negative intuition about a person, then the person seems all evil, and what he really is matters not at all. But little by little such a patient begins to ask what the object is like after all, and to have the desire to experience the object directly. Then she is able to give sensation its proper value, and she stops looking at the object from around a corner; in a word, she is ready to sacrifice her overpowering desire to master by intuition.
    Introduction to Jungian Psychology, Notes of the Seminar on Analytical Psychology Given in 1925 -- C.G. Jung -- Pg 134-135


    This same person came originally came to Jung about a snake in her belly(48m10s to ~54m):

    Facetious Frank

  10. #70
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Question

    About the function order thing...

    Perhaps we are born into our dominant function without its direction being clear at the time of birth... If the baby is physiologically sensitive\fearful to external world\and stimuli, his libido\energy is directed inwards and hides inside whereas if the baby is resistant to external stimuli then his\her energy is directed outwards...

    I imagine that our external functions be them judging or perceiving are not only outlets of self's expression but also inlets of external information (windows to our soul)...

    Hence if the dominant function transforms into an external function...it starts gathering external data that now stimulates the internal domain of the self...Hence the self as a reaction develops an auxiliary internal function to analyze and make sense of the accumulated data...?

    If the dominant turns into an internal function, then the child would start stimulating his own internal world which would create internally generated data that would need to be expressed externally, hence the creation of the auxiliary external outlet?

    There must be some kind of inadequacy or need to prompt the development of 3rd and 4th functions (raising them to the conscious level of the self)... Perhaps that has something to do with adolescence and interactions with the opposite sex...In another thread we proposed that 3rd and 4th functions are related to the anima, which I believe to be an archaic\instinctive mechanism that enables us to detect members of the opposite sex who are strong in our 3rd and 4th functions... So perhaps adolescence and sexuality triggers the development of the 3rd and 4th functions so that the self can find sexually compatible partners...

    And by choosing a direction for our dominant function, we turn our backs to the opposite of the dominant functions, which then constitutes our shadow...

    To that end:

    Dominant function development would be complete (in the conscious part of the self) when we gain consciousness of ourselves i.e. at 5-6 years of age....

    Auxiliary function would perhaps become available to the conscious part of the self starting from 5-6 years of age to complement the dominant....

    Then tertiary and inferior would be available to the conscious self around adolescence (11-12 years of age) and would grow gradually in life?

    And around 25-30, we are capable of using our external functions to soak external data inside the self and then analyze them thru our internal functions and then use the external functions once more to express the analysis externally...etc.?

    And how does perceiving and judging class of functions fit into this?
    Last edited by yeghor; 03-23-2014 at 03:45 PM. Reason: Blue added

Similar Threads

  1. [Ni] Carl Jung describes Ni
    By labyrinthine in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 09-26-2017, 02:41 PM
  2. [Ni] Carl Jung about Ni
    By Fay in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 01-21-2016, 05:41 PM
  3. Video: Carl Jung on intuition and the Ni (Introverted Intuition)
    By highlander in forum Typology Videos and RSS Feeds
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-14-2014, 11:14 PM
  4. Ni Doms: What are your thoughts on God?
    By Zarathustra in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 139
    Last Post: 08-22-2012, 08:44 AM
  5. [Ni] INFJ and Ni doms, how do you make decisions?
    By fidelia in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-14-2012, 02:53 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