User Tag List

First 12345 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 41

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    bad
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    You're not looking under the hood; you've left the Jungmobile behind.
    True, as in "I left all modern consensus" & "I have my own follow-up theories" & "I do destroy MBTI"

    But I do use Jung's definitions of the 8 points-on-the-spectrum (8 "function-attitude-combos") as axioms. I did't change or remove this foundation, so I don't leave the Jungian model behind at all.

    May I just talk to you all from these 8 common points-on-the-spectrum, and may I just call them functions again now, for simplicity's sake? And isn't it possible to communicate sensibly with all on this forum from that common perspective? (Or what other axioms/definitions would be missing in that case? Please do tell.)

  2. #22
    noʎ ɟo ǝʇnɔ ʍoH Mademoiselle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    MBTI
    -NTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    928

    Default

    ..I’ve been looking for you.
    Please come and hear me out.
    Imagine this is the best thing you've ever read.

  3. #23
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    559

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Researcher View Post
    You are right that Jung's definition of function is that it has 2 attitudes (e/i). True indeed, that he didn't define 8 functions, but he defined 4 functions x 2 attitudes = 8 pure types.
    True, that its only modern after-thought where we call Jung's 8 pure types, 8 "Jungian cognitive functions", even though Jung never called them that.
    But he did describe these 8 pure types (which we nowadays call 8 functions) one by one in chapter 10 of psychological types obviously. So even if he had 4 functions, he did define the "8 functions" even if he didnt call them functions but "pure types".

    But nice find here actually. But how then can I call Fe on this forum according to you? (If am not allowed to call it a function according to you.) If I say pure type instead, or "function-attitude-combo", won't that just make things even harder for most on this forum? How do you suggest I call Fe?
    (P.S. Aren't you just making things more complicated? What is the goal here? Trying to test me? Trying to find my flaws? You are not really on subject about the aux anymore, which was your main concern at first)
    What I said in my post was that Jung had a four-function model for any particular individual. He most certainly did describe eight functions. For you to say he didn't describe eight "functions," just eight "types" — and that calling those eight "functions" is a "modern after-thought" — is just silly.

    Here's are the subchapter headings for the introverted half of Chapter X (in the modern translation):

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung
    The Introverted Type
    a. The General Attitude of Consciousness
    b. The Attitude of the Unconscious
    c. The Peculiarities of the Basic Psychological Functions in the Introverted Attitude
    Thinking
    The Introverted Thinking Type
    Feeling
    The Introverted Feeling Type
    Summary of the Introverted Rational Types
    Sensation
    The Introverted Sensation Type
    Intuition
    The Introverted Intuitive Type
    Summary of the Introverted Irrational Types
    Prior to his subchapter on "The Introverted Thinking Type," there's a subchapter on introverted thinking — one of his eight "functions." And yes, "functions" is the term he almost always used to refer to those eight things, notwithstanding that he also used the same term ("functions") to refer to the four functions in the absence of attitudes (S, N, T and F).

    So no, you're certainly free to refer to "Fe" as a "function" as far as I'm concerned. That would be completely consistent with Jung.

    But again, Jung thought that the psyche of any particular individual would typically only harbor four of the eight functions — two conscious and two unconscious.

    Also: you continue to refer to the idea of a "pure type," and I addressed that issue earlier, and I asked you what you meant by a "pure type," and you still haven't responded.

    As I previously pointed out, Jung noted that his Chapter X portraits were artificially "pure" in terms of leaving out the characteristics that would distinguish, e.g., an Fi-dom with an N-aux from an Fi-dom with an S-aux. But he said that the characteristics that he included in his portraits were the "common and therefore typical features" of his types — rather than characteristics that only applied to some small minority of people who were "pure types" because they lacked an auxiliary.

    What does "pure type" mean to you?

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    bad
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Pure type is a person without a second function in its "function ordering". It is a theoretical person exactly representing the definition of one of the 8 functions. This means the person exactly on the north pole (the function being the north pole), not the person with a slight distance from the north pole.
    It is not "missing something, like begin less without a second function" or "unhealthy" or "impossible", its just an exact location, according to an exact definition. And in real life nobody is exact, so its a theoretical absolute type to compare the real manifested types to, not a real manifested type by itself.

    Since in real life, all manifested types have a small distance from the absolute pole (the primary), we need to say in which direction that distance goes, this direction is the aux, which is another pole, somewhere on the spectrum. It remains aux as long as you stay closer to the primary pole. As soon as you get closer to the other pole, the primary and aux flip, as the new primary is now closer.

    The thing where my theories hurt most, to most, is that I destroy the thought that functions are separate "machines". I say they are just beacons/markers/locations on the spectrum. The functions don't exist other than that.
    (And Jung said this as well, there is even a YouTube video online of old footage where he says so in real life on camera. If I bump into the video again I will post it)

    So since the functions don't exist , other than that they are just locations, the pure type with just 1 function (if it would manifest exactly), would not be missing anything, nor would it be unhealthy.

  5. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    bad
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mademoiselle View Post
    ..I’ve been looking for you.
    Please come and hear me out.
    OK, I see you added me. Send in the story?

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    bad
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GarrotTheThief View Post
    I have come to the conclusion with a Jungian analyst who has been analyzing for 30+ years that the personality is like a flower rather than a binary circuit board and typology can only serve in a very general sense and even Jung himself conceded that a fourfold model would probably still apply to a very small minority of people which happened to be his patients, and that the time, place, history, culture, and biology would all be relevant in this....but of course, typology is so fun that cookie cutter wars is kind of a neat excuse to take a break from studying or working.

    What do you think about that?
    Well, I said it too many times in this thread already: the functions don't exist as "machines" or a circuit-board as you say, its a spectrum obviously.
    Likes GarrotTheThief liked this post

  7. #27
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    bad
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reckful View Post
    But the substance of your posts — including this latest one, in spades — make it clear you haven't even read Psychological Types with any care, and very much misunderstand Jung's function model for a typical person.
    A Muslim once "judged" that I am "uneducated/stupid" because I didn't read the Koran (instead of first "perceiving" if I actually did read it). Then he was "forced" to find out, that I did read it 3x, and even remembered it well. Then he told me: it is not relevant because you don't know Arabic, and translations don't count.
    Likes Thalassa liked this post

  8. #28
    Senior Member reckful's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    559

    Default

    If you see him riding on a bamboo cane, say to him: "Good health to your horse."

    — Moroccan proverb.
    Likes Nicodemus liked this post

  9. #29
    Rainy Day Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    1,620

    Default

    Hi, @Researcher, and welcome to the forums.

    I noticed you have "bad" entered as your enneagram type. What are your thoughts on the enneagram? Do you think it's a bad system?

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    bad
    Socionics
    ENTp
    Posts
    86

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ingrid in grids View Post
    Hi, @Researcher, and welcome to the forums.

    I noticed you have "bad" entered as your enneagram type. What are your thoughts on the enneagram? Do you think it's a bad system?
    Yes, kind of.... (But maybe I just don't know it well enough.)

Similar Threads

  1. [Tri] Enneagrams that will try to pimp you
    By draon9 in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 12-21-2016, 06:20 PM
  2. Trying to type my 10-year-old
    By phoenix31 in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 07-02-2016, 02:08 AM
  3. Replies: 171
    Last Post: 07-21-2013, 07:22 AM
  4. 10 year old refuses to salute the flag...
    By kyuuei in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 132
    Last Post: 12-02-2009, 08:06 PM
  5. [Other] What do you think will happen to the world 50 years from now?
    By yenom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 09-16-2009, 02:23 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