User Tag List

First 910111213 Last

Results 101 to 110 of 144

  1. #101
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    proof.
    I fail to see what this proves if anything.

  2. #102
    ReflecTcelfeR
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RaptorWizard View Post
    I fail to see what this proves if anything.
    The description is a good reason for Jung having Se aux and Ni tertiary. The style implies Ti.

  3. #103
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,806

    Default

    Jung changed his mind a few times. He even mentioned that the type..."is nothing static and changes over the course of life". Ironically this is a view not held by most MBTI followers.

    There is a video somewhere from an old video where he states he was most characterised by Thinking and Intuition and that this is all the evidence you need for his type. Ill have a look for it.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  4. #104
    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 RaptorWizard View Post
    I fail to see what this proves if anything.
    that's part of the point. you see words in your "proof" that fit your idea of what jung is and don't seem to look around much to see how that fits into a bigger picture. in your context, him identifying in any way with those functions means that he is those things in the way that we understand the conditions of type now (conditions that have emerged over a long period of time and whose definiteness have tightened through practice, altho conditions that we still do not necessarily agree upon and often lead to incommensurability between how groups of us use type theory). i see a different description, written in jung's at times mystical language, from a book i am holding in my hands, written by a man who chased down the esoteric, the secret numinosum of the world of the mind as it spanned in all directions at the same time. the unknown, the mysterious, the paradox of the infinite ungraspable whole that bounds everything yet cannot be a class of itself, the world of creatura and pleroma that gregory bateson utilized in his theory of mind that jung used in his mystical "seven sermons to the dead," a man who spent much of his free time in the practice of making mandalas as a way of building fractal mind maps that ARE the unspeakable information structure of Ni. he seeks out the most ornately conceptual spaces possible, metaphysics, spirituality, myth, mandalas, alchemy, esoteric religion and heremeticism, chakra/kundalini yoga, psychology, and the world of mind. as a tag cloud, Ni is at the center. typological thinking, analogical mapping schemes, symbolic compression, this essential game creating emergent categories that recenter how we perceive meaningful difference, lenses to focus our attention that change how we generate readings, is the Ni game. this is the process of creating meaning, the weberian term verstehen. Ne is more about actualization. because it operates outside of paradigms, it doesn't usually bother making new ones (especially true of extroverted Ne doms who act more, who try more, and who find new spaces more frequently but who are rarely searching for a new space with the deliberateness and care of an inp). it just has a much greater freedom of movement.

    even in the actual evidence you used for your claim, you don't contextualize a reading. in the first excerpt people use to define jung as intp, he says "And my relation to reality was not particularly brilliant. … I was often at variance with the reality of things." to not respond to things as they are is to not be an Se type. to have scientific training which demands ontic proof does not mean that as his theory evolved and as his context changed, he could not realize that these ideals instilled in him as his most salient identity at the time had led to a confirmation bias. or that, and i relate to this, he could not see his actual self-as-an-object but could only see his referential self, the self made out of categories that he identified with (show me one infj 5w4, for instance, who didn't identify with intp descriptions really strongly or mistype like i did, a process which requires another level of disambiguation to decide between the world of e5, so intp seeming, and the world of infj, so e4/e9 seeming). furthermore, not feeling at home in reality is a theme throughout the entire retrospective section of memories, dreams, reflections that i pull my quotation from. to be able to separate from the noisy details of the situation, to make a typological theory, conceptual theory, you have to rely on intuition to aggregate and reaggregate categories that are both themselves and not themselves, that are different and the same at the same time (and at different scales of time). to see the world as simply self-evident, as if it is simply explicating itself, that kind of direct ontic experience, doesn't lead to the same kind of theoretical synthesis, the ongoing tautological circularity where you map out categories that do not yet exist and test them over and over. typological thinking is not a straight line. it is a series of transparencies that you weave together in a topological way to reconcile paradoxes that then alter the conditions of perception. that mystery of deducing the causes from the effects.

    in the second excerpt from your site, the authors follow up by saying that it was written by a much younger jung, whose theory was at an earlier stage, because simply identifying the cognitive functions is not the same as having a comprehensive, synthesized theory of individuation. i mean, even now, we still struggle recognizing the relationship of the anima and animus and archetypal images that show the process of moving towards integration at a T-F level that are another way of demonstrating the necessity of embodying the spirit of the yin yang to move towards wholeness. the contextual holism of jung's project makes these kinds of reading issues extraordinarily complex; the varying levels of description needed to build a model of personality and individuation in all the respective contexts in which their differences can emerge while still compressing them symbolically, typologically, categorically requires constant bifurcations and reconciliations, a dialectic that is both structure, process, and interfacing. expectation, actualization, and integration. anyway, the authors go on to say that these quotations about functions jung "identifies" with ultimately make unpersuasive cases, because they believe he is an infj.

  5. #105
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    xxTP
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Carl Jung typed himself as an ISTP.

    You have got to love a theory which is so vague, that people can confidently "type" the founder of said theory, completely AGAINST HIS OWN TYPING OF HIMSELF, some centuries after his death, based on a personal hunch.

    L.O.L

  6. #106
    Senior Member the state i am in's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    MBTI
    infj
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    could the critique of vagueness be partly a critique of your ability to read it?

  7. #107
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    xxTP
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by the state i am in View Post
    could the critique of vagueness be partly a critique of your ability to read it?
    Could your critique of my ability to read it, be a critique of your ability to justify it? :p

  8. #108
    Wake, See, Sing, Dance Cellmold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    5,806

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Il Morto Che Parla View Post
    Carl Jung typed himself as an ISTP.

    You have got to love a theory which is so vague, that people can confidently "type" the founder of said theory, completely AGAINST HIS OWN TYPING OF HIMSELF, some centuries after his death, based on a personal hunch.

    L.O.L
    I actually have no problem with Carl Jung being ISTP.

    But he does contradict himself.

    Watch this video from 8:42 :



    Well...you see, the type is nothing static, it changes with the course of life....but I most certainly was characterised by thinking, or I thought, from early childhood on and...I had a great deal of intuition too and I had a definite difficulty with feeling...and my relationship to reality...was not particularly brilliant, I was often at variance with the reality of things.
    'One of (Lucas) Cranach's masterpieces, discussed by (Joseph) Koerner, is in it's self-referentiality the perfect expression of left-hemisphere emptiness and a precursor of post-modernism. There is no longer anything to point to beyond, nothing Other, so it points pointlessly to itself.' - Iain McGilChrist

    Suppose a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?"
    "Suppose it didn't," said Pooh, after careful thought.
    Piglet was comforted by this.
    - A.A. Milne.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sx/so
    Socionics
    Will
    Posts
    5,927

    Default

    @the state i am in seems to see Jung as INFJ 5w4 though I can't tell for sure if he is that or ISTP and it seems like he could even be a 9w1.

  10. #110
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    MBTI
    xxTP
    Posts
    1,261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AffirmitiveAnxiety View Post
    I actually have no problem with Carl Jung being ISTP.

    But he does contradict himself.

    Watch this video from 8:42 :

    I wouldn't necessarilly say he contradicts himself, an ISTP in a Ti-Ni loop may fit that description perfectly

Similar Threads

  1. What MBTI type was Carl Jung
    By five in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 455
    Last Post: 04-13-2017, 12:51 AM
  2. Carl Jung 'Proves' Existence Of An Auxiliary Function
    By Mal12345 in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 07-07-2013, 12:08 PM
  3. CARL JUNG, NEO-GNOSTICISM, & THE MBTI
    By marm in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-15-2012, 06:22 AM
  4. [NT] Defining Moments in the making of an NT.
    By ladypinkington in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 07-15-2012, 06:42 PM
  5. [NT] What Compels An NT to Cheat?
    By LadyJaye in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 11-23-2007, 01:13 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