[NT] Was Carl Jung an NT?

[RaptorWizard]

proof.

I fail to see what this proves if anything.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

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.

 

[Cellmold]

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.

 

[the state i am in]

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.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

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

 

[the state i am in]

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

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

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?

 

[Cellmold]

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.

 

[RaptorWizard]

[MENTION=6275]the state i am in[/MENTION] 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.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

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

 

[INTP]

Carl Jung identified as ISTP.

Proof:
The Case for ISTP

However, there is a manuscript prepared in 1926, published in English as Analytical Psychology: Notes of the Seminar Given in 1925. Here Jung identifies as another type:

As a natural scientist, thinking and sensation were uppermost in me and intuition and feeling were in the unconscious and contaminated by the collective unconscious. [Princeton University Press 1991 edition, p. 69]

source - http://www.celebritytypes.com/blog/2012/02/jung-identified-himself-as-both-intp-and-istp/

"I most certainly was characterized by Thinking … and I had a great deal of iNtuition, too. And I had a definite difficulty with Feeling. And my relation to reality was not particularly brilliant. … I was often at variance with the reality of things. Now that gives you all the necessary data for diagnosis."
-interview of jung

his relation to reality not being particularly brilliant obviously means not using Se, especially not as dom or aux. also notice how he expressed his F being lower than S.

in the quote you mentioned, he is talking himself as a scientist, so it might mean that he was using his S and T most in the scientist aspect of him, he did after all make his discoveries by looking 'what is' inside(Si) of himself and creating an subjective rationalization to it(Ti), then he went to look at how it fits the big picture around him etc, which indicates to Ne. N is an unconscious function and inferior is contaminated by the collective unconscious the most.

 

[RaptorWizard]

[MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]

It sounds like you are inventing explanations and reasonings of want you want to believe rather than what is actually true since you are probably just like, "Oh I'm INTP and I like Carl Jung so therefore we must be the same type!" Of course I could be a hypocrite since I accused him of being ISTP but the evidence favors me since the source which has high credentials says it means he is identifying as ISTP.

 

[INTP]

INTP

It sounds like you are inventing explanations and reasonings of want you want to believe rather than what is actually true since you are probably just like, "Oh I'm INTP and I like Carl Jung so therefore we must be the same type!" Of course I could be a hypocrite since I accused him of being ISTP but the evidence favors me since the source which has high credentials says it means he is identifying as ISTP.

there is a case for INTP and ISTP, as he never strictly said he was neither type. i dont think evidence favors you, i just wanted to point out that you can give explanation for your "evidence", but the fact that he says on a video that his N > S, you cant deny.

not to mention that jung thought that your secondary function can change, nowadays we dont see typology that way(and research in big 5 has confirmed that personality doesent vary all that much). how ever, one can get in dom/tert "loops" or get obsessed with their tert for other reasons(jung thought that in order to get to inferior, you would need to have a battle between aux and tert, in which tert is strengthened), which could potentially make you look as if your tert was your aux, especially to someone who is just figuring out and pioneering the system. notice that he said that in my quote, he is talking in past tense when talking about N and S, which means that he grew up as N type. todays research shows that your personality is quite stable from early adulthood(and the variation can be explained by coming more conscious and learning to handle your tert/inferior). i could go on and on about this, but this already PROVES that your quote does not prove anything and can be explained with other explanations than with him being an ISTP. you know its not a proof, if it can be given an alternative explanations, which have been proven.

blah i hate this subject, since most people dont have any idea on what they are talking about, dont understand typology from jungs perspective, dont understand personality psychology of today and bla bla bla

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

"I most certainly was characterized by Thinking … and I had a great deal of iNtuition, too. And I had a definite difficulty with Feeling. And my relation to reality was not particularly brilliant. … I was often at variance with the reality of things. Now that gives you all the necessary data for diagnosis."
-interview of jung

his relation to reality not being particularly brilliant obviously means not using Se, especially not as dom or aux. also notice how he expressed his F being lower than S.

in the quote you mentioned, he is talking himself as a scientist, so it might mean that he was using his S and T most in the scientist aspect of him, he did after all make his discoveries by looking 'what is' inside(Si) of himself and creating an subjective rationalization to it(Ti), then he went to look at how it fits the big picture around him etc, which indicates to Ne. N is an unconscious function and inferior is contaminated by the collective unconscious the most.

Who says SP's are realistic? Do you know any!? Some of the most unrealistic people I know are SP.

Honestly,it is funny that based on one paragraph, you know more about him than the man itself who also happens to have founded the theory.

And rather than think he may have worded one paragraph badly. You take that paragraph above all the rest of his claims about himself.

Completely illogical.

 

[INTP]

Who says SP's are realistic? Do you know any!? Some of the most unrealistic people I know are SP.

Honestly,it is funny that based on one paragraph, you know more about him than the man itself who also happens to have founded the theory.

And rather than think he may have worded one paragraph badly. You take that paragraph above all the rest of his claims about himself.

Completely illogical.

that post isnt worthy of other comments than

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

that post isnt worthy of other comments than

arguments=0.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

Just to show you one example of your confirmation bias:

not to mention that jung thought that your secondary function can change, nowadays we dont see typology that way(and research in big 5 has confirmed that personality doesent vary all that much). how ever, one can get in dom/tert "loops" or get obsessed with their tert for other reasons(jung thought that in order to get to inferior, you would need to have a battle between aux and tert, in which tert is strengthened), which could potentially make you look as if your tert was your aux, especially to someone who is just figuring out and pioneering the system.

The exact same logic above, could be used to believe that when he described himself as "unrealistic", he was describing a time in which he was in a Ti-Ni loop. If you were so inclined to interpret the argument that way.

However you choose to interpret him only in the way which suits your pre-defined belief.

Why are people so keen to believe that an xNxP can be in a Ji-Si loop, but never believe that an xSxP can be in a Ji-Ni loop? You always hear the former referenced, but never the latter.

This MBTI theory is often just an excuse for a mass group exercise in mental masturbation.

 

[INTP]

Just to show you one example of your confirmation bias:



The exact same logic above, could be used to believe that when he described himself as "unrealistic", he was describing a time in which he was in a Ti-Ni loop. If you were so inclined to interpret the argument that way.

However you choose to interpret him only in the way which suits your pre-defined belief.

Why are people so keen to believe that an xNxP can be in a Ji-Si loop, but never believe that an xSxP can be in a Ji-Ni loop? You always hear the former referenced, but never the latter.

This MBTI theory is often just an excuse for a mass group exercise in mental masturbation.

he never said to be unrealistic and i never claimed him to be unrealistic, and maybe i should add that i dont think N equals unrealistic(since you probably deduced that i do) and S equals realistic. think about the rest, i dont see any idea of talking to you if you arent able to comprehend properly what is being said. if you want a proper reply, prove that you are worthy of it.

 

[Il Morto Che Parla]

he never said to be unrealistic

Quote from the video which you yourself posted:

"I most certainly was characterized by Thinking … and I had a great deal of iNtuition, too. And I had a definite difficulty with Feeling. And my relation to reality was not particularly brilliant. … I was often at variance with the reality of things. Now that gives you all the necessary data for diagnosis."
-interview of jung

and i never claimed him to be unrealistic, and maybe i should add that i dont think N equals unrealistic(since you probably deduced that i do) and S equals realistic.

Fine, but then what is your basis for this claim you made?:

the fact that he says on a video that his N > S, you cant deny.

if you want a proper reply, prove that you are worthy of it.

Who said I want a reply? If you can make your case coherently you will do so, if not, you won't...it's the same to me!

 

[INTP]

Quote from the video which you yourself posted:





Fine, but then what is your basis for this claim you made?:





Who said I want a reply? If you can make your case coherently you will do so, if not, you won't...it's the same to me!

Unreal means opposite of real; 'not real'. He said: "And my relation to reality was not particularly brilliant.". Which doesent mean unreal, but not being in touch with reality all that well, i.e. not paying much attention to 'what is'.. Stop replacing the words you read and it will make things much easier.