User Tag List

View Poll Results: How do you rate this book?

8. You may not vote on this poll
  • * (worst)

    1 12.50%
  • **

    1 12.50%
  • ***

    1 12.50%
  • ****

    3 37.50%
  • ***** (best)

    2 25.00%
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Psychological Types

  1. #1
    Administrator Array highlander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    6w5 sx/sp
    ILI Ni

    Default Psychological Types

    Psychological Types is the original book from the inventor of the system upon which all the other stuff is based. I read this on a balcony in Cancun, overlooking a rather large pool and the Atlantic Ocean, which was what I enjoyed most about the experience. Jung provides some historical perspectives on type, explaining different systems that have been used in the past or at least perspectives from various leading theorists. The core material is in chapter 10 (Roman Numeral X) which is a general description of the types. With chapters like "The Type Problem in Poetry", "The Type Problem In Modern Philosophy" and "The Type Problem In Biography", I found this book to be quite tedious to get through. It's highly theoretical nature and Jung's preponderous and meandering writing style were painful for me to tolerate. I forced myself to read it all because people speak so highly about the book. Yeah I know it's a classic and a lot of people revere the guy but I really didn't enjoy reading this.

    I give it two stars.

    Please provide feedback on my Nohari and Johari Window by clicking here: Nohari/Johari

    Tri-type 639

  2. #2
    Senior Member Array INTP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    5w4 sx


    Best book on typology that everyone should attempt to read(and understand, that means reading it many times over the years), but its quite a heavy read and most people will never understand what Jung means with many of the stuff in it, no matter how many times they read it. I think S and Te types will most likely have the most problems reading the book, since its full of TiNe with some(pretty poor ) attempts of making it somewhat believable for Te folks/academia.

    10/10 for me, but for someone who doesent tolerate theory, is a bit soft in the head, havent studied psychology, doesent want to process the information that they read or doesent want to connect over 9000 dots to get the big picture, i cant recommend the book for. The book is not made for a layman or for the regular internet age typology hobbyist, so it shouldnt be rated based on whether some people with no background on analytical psychology can understand it or not. The deal is that the subject that the book covers(typology) is so complex that writing about it(in some other way than using some stereotypes) requires complex ideas to be explained, and trying to simplify it too much will just result in poor understanding of the subject for the reader.
    "Where wisdom reigns, there is no conflict between thinking and feeling."
    — C.G. Jung


  3. #3


    I read this after I found that so many online type theorists differ in how they define functions and type. I wanted to get to the root of the matter, both historically and etymologically. That said, it was painful to read, but not the most grueling of his works IMO. While most of his books exemplify the mindset of a pedantic, prejudiced old codger, they also reveal a level of general gloom about human nature not so easily stomached. For some this would be poison, for others an antidote. I'll admit that it brought me closer where other sources repeatedly failed me, but not necessarily because I agreed with Jung's perspectives.

    The authority Jung exercises while attempting to type historical figures and the reasoning he uses left me contemplating about various typings I previously took for granted. A reminder of how feeble and inconsistent the typing process can be, even if you're Jung himself.

    It's a good time if your curiosity proceeds you, or if you're doing enough recreational drugs.

  4. #4


    This book was a fucking snoozefest. No, seriously, each time I tried to read it I literally fell asleep.

  5. #5


    Quote Originally Posted by senza tema View Post
    This book was a fucking snoozefest. No, seriously, each time I tried to read it I literally fell asleep.

  6. #6


    I think that's why a lot of people think Jung was a 9, because his books amble along, like an old man on an afternoon stroll. If only Freud could have written Jung's ideas for him. I know they were estranged by that point, I'm just playing the TypoC equivalent to that game that tweenaged girls like to play: Imagine X's face on that Y's body.

    Imagine Jung's ideas, expressed through Freud's more economical writing style. Aw baby...I'm getting all hot and bothered just thinking about it.

  7. #7
    Senior Member Array Verona's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2016
    6w5 so


    A bit of a tedious read and some of it I disagree with like where he says extraverted feeling is found exclusively in women. If you can get through it I think it is a good foundation to have but if you can't there are other books where the functions are explained in a more understandable manner.
    Likes highlander liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. [JCF] An explanation of why academia hasn't accepted, or even tested, Psychological Types
    By funtensity in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-25-2014, 03:55 PM
  2. Review of new book: 'The Question of Psychological Types'
    By Economica in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-28-2013, 05:14 PM
  3. INTJ & INTP & Psychological Types
    By Jack Flak in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-31-2012, 09:56 AM
  4. Personality Types better equipped to go through physical and psychological torture?
    By curiousel in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 11-08-2011, 09:33 PM
  5. A Critic of Psychological Types (not the functions).
    By Little_Sticks in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 08-20-2010, 03:37 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