What MBTI type was Carl Jung

[ICUP]

Have no idea what type he was....
But I will say that this absolutely reeks of ISTP:

"Jung stressed the importance of individual rights in a person's relation to the state and society. He saw that the state was treated as "a quasi-animate personality from whom everything is expected" but that this personality was "only camouflage for those individuals who know how to manipulate it",[31] and referred to the state as a form of slavery.[32][33][34][35] He also thought that the state "swallowed up [people's] religious forces",[36] and therefore that the state had "taken the place of God"—making it comparable to a religion in which "state slavery is a form of worship".[34] Jung observed that "stage acts of [the] state" are comparable to religious displays: "Brass bands, flags, banners, parades and monster demonstrations are no different in principle from ecclesiastical processions, cannonades and fire to scare off demons".[37] From Jung's perspective, this replacement of God with the state in a mass society led to the dislocation of the religious drive and resulted in the same fanaticism of the church-states of the Dark Ages—wherein the more the state is 'worshiped', the more freedom and morality are suppressed;[38] this ultimately leaves the individual psychically undeveloped with extreme feelings of marginalization.[39]"

Maybe he was ISTP 5w6? Seems a possibility.

 

[Mal12345]

Have no idea what type he was....
But I will say that this absolutely reeks of ISTP:

"Jung stressed the importance of individual rights in a person's relation to the state and society. He saw that the state was treated as "a quasi-animate personality from whom everything is expected" but that this personality was "only camouflage for those individuals who know how to manipulate it",[31] and referred to the state as a form of slavery.[32][33][34][35] He also thought that the state "swallowed up [people's] religious forces",[36] and therefore that the state had "taken the place of God"—making it comparable to a religion in which "state slavery is a form of worship".[34] Jung observed that "stage acts of [the] state" are comparable to religious displays: "Brass bands, flags, banners, parades and monster demonstrations are no different in principle from ecclesiastical processions, cannonades and fire to scare off demons".[37] From Jung's perspective, this replacement of God with the state in a mass society led to the dislocation of the religious drive and resulted in the same fanaticism of the church-states of the Dark Ages—wherein the more the state is 'worshiped', the more freedom and morality are suppressed;[38] this ultimately leaves the individual psychically undeveloped with extreme feelings of marginalization.[39]"

Maybe he was ISTP 5w6? Seems a possibility.

Are you referring to the annoying numbers strewn throughout your wikipedia quote?

 

[ICUP]

Are you referring to the annoying numbers strewn throughout your wikipedia quote?

LoL, too busy thinking about the info to notice. Doesn't bother me.

-------------

Still, an uneducated guess would be intp for me.
The mysticism is a little weird, but I have not studied him, and have no idea of what time/place he lived in.

 

[Eric B]

I've never completely made my mind. He might be more Ti-ish ultimately, but what I think is making people think INTJ is the apparent "dryness" of his language, which makes his "interaction style" seem "directive", rather than informative. So he seems like a Chart the Course, and since he is clearly INT, then it seems like INTJ.

Another person who had this issue, and I know is INTP: our own Solitary Walker (who some suggested was INTJ way earlier in the "Mistyped Members" thread).

 

[Thalassa]

I think he was an ISTP, he said so himself, and I'm quite certain he understood his own theory.

As for Solitary Walker, he is TOTALLY INTP. No INTJ there, no sir.

 

[ICUP]

Holy Shit.....

http://marcbeneteau.com/2009/07/carl-jung-writing-on-loneliness-meaning-and-purpose/

This looks more like my writing. Except, of course, he is about a billion times more thoughtful and intelligent lmao. Who knows, though, since it is a translation, how he actually said it. Looks like an interesting book, nevertheless. I may pick up a couple of books.......

"As a child I felt myself to be alone, and I am still, because I know things and must hint at things which others apparently know nothing of, and for the most part do not want to know."

Good God, I can So relate to this.

---------

Hmmm, thinking istp 5w6 sx/so? Seems possible.....


-----------

I think he was an ISTP, he said so himself, and I'm quite certain he understood his own theory.

Any ideas where I can see where he said this? What book, or..... ?

 

[KDude]

There were two types of intuition Jung referred to in German, and one was Einfall, the other Ahnung. Einfall (Fallen) was more akin to Ne, where conditions on the outside poured down like a rain into the consciousness, giving moments of revelatory insight. Jung more of the Ahnung type of intuitive, although you'd have to read between the lines a bit. His insights were borne from long periods of introversion, building models over time, not revelation. His sense of extroversion came afterwards. Like a man coming from down a mountain, finally able to find a means to apply it to the outside world. "The years when I was pursuing my inner images were the most important of my life - in them everything essential was decided. It all began then; the later details are only supplements and clarifications of the material that burst forth from the unconscious, and at first swamped me. It was the prima materia for a life's work." Einfall on the other hand is said to be more clear in consciousness right away.. while he had to work on clarifying his views first.

So anyways, I think he was INTJ or INFJ.

 

[ICUP]

"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. You cannot get directly to the inferior function from the superior, it must always be via the auxiliary function. It is as though the unconscious were in such antagonism to the superior function that it allowed no direct attack. The process of working through auxiliary functions goes on somewhat as follows: Suppose you have sensation strongly developed but are not fanatical about it. Then you can admit about every situation a certain aura of possibilities; that is to say, you permit an intuitive element to come in. Sensation as an auxiliary function would allow intuition to exist. But inasmuch as sensation (in the example) is a partisan of the intellect, intuition sides with the feeling, here the inferior function. Therefore the intellect will not agree with intuition, in this case, and will vote for its exclusion. Intellect will not hold together sensation and intuition, rather it will separate them. Such a destructive attempt will be checked by feeling, which backs up intuition.

"Looking at it the other way around, if you are an intuitive type, you can't get to your sensations directly. They are full of monsters, and so you have to go by way of your intellect or feeling, whichever is the auxiliary in the conscious. it needs very cool reasoning for such a man to keep himself down to reality. To sum up then, the way is from the superior to the auxiliary, from the latter to the function opposite to the auxiliary. Usually this first conflict that is aroused between the auxiliary function in the conscious and its opposite function in the unconscious is the fight that takes place in analysis. This may be called the preliminary conflict. The knock-down battle between the superior and inferior functions only takes place in life. In the example of the intellectual sensation type, I suggested the preliminary conflict would be between sensation and intuition, and the final fight between intellect and feeling."

Supposedly from Analytical Psychology
So, I suppose that does settle it. He's a 5. ISTP 5 sx/so. Explains it all quite well.

 

[OrangeAppled]

Supposedly from Analytical Psychology
So, I suppose that does settle it. He's a 5. ISTP 5 sx/so. Explains it all quite well.

Which I'm pretty sure that was published long before he gave this quote from the interview posted earlier in the thread (when he was 80+ yrs old), which suggests his sensing preference was not very strong:

Well, you see, the type is nothing static. It changes in the course of life. But I most certainly was characterized by thinking. I overthought from early childhood on. And I had a great deal of intuition, too. And I had 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 the diagnosis.

It seems that Jung changed his mind on his type (because he did not view type as static) and/or people are interpreting these quotes to suit their view, which is often to make him their type. The other quotes you used ICUP don't strike me as ISTP in particular. I can relate to the reasoning in those myself, and I don't think Jung is INFP at all.

What I'm getting from this is that he felt he was a Thinking type when young and then became an iNtuitive type as his iNtuition took over (which had always been strong though).

If people are arguing heavy use of the tertiary characterizing him (saying he was Ti-Ni or Ni-Ti), then you could also argue that when he made the quote about sensing he was Ti-Si, then as his iNtuition "grew" he came to use Ne more. There's no reason to assume the sensing he used was Se.

 

[KDude]

"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. You cannot get directly to the inferior function from the superior, it must always be via the auxiliary function. It is as though the unconscious were in such antagonism to the superior function that it allowed no direct attack. The process of working through auxiliary functions goes on somewhat as follows: Suppose you have sensation strongly developed but are not fanatical about it. Then you can admit about every situation a certain aura of possibilities; that is to say, you permit an intuitive element to come in. Sensation as an auxiliary function would allow intuition to exist. But inasmuch as sensation (in the example) is a partisan of the intellect, intuition sides with the feeling, here the inferior function. Therefore the intellect will not agree with intuition, in this case, and will vote for its exclusion. Intellect will not hold together sensation and intuition, rather it will separate them. Such a destructive attempt will be checked by feeling, which backs up intuition.

"Looking at it the other way around, if you are an intuitive type, you can't get to your sensations directly. They are full of monsters, and so you have to go by way of your intellect or feeling, whichever is the auxiliary in the conscious. it needs very cool reasoning for such a man to keep himself down to reality. To sum up then, the way is from the superior to the auxiliary, from the latter to the function opposite to the auxiliary. Usually this first conflict that is aroused between the auxiliary function in the conscious and its opposite function in the unconscious is the fight that takes place in analysis. This may be called the preliminary conflict. The knock-down battle between the superior and inferior functions only takes place in life. In the example of the intellectual sensation type, I suggested the preliminary conflict would be between sensation and intuition, and the final fight between intellect and feeling."

Supposedly from Analytical Psychology
So, I suppose that does settle it. He's a 5. ISTP 5 sx/so. Explains it all quite well.

ISTP is very interesting actually. I wouldn't necessarily rule it out now.

His words make me wonder how far removed I am from that myself. I know many around here consider me a "sensor", but I see those "monsters" from sensation that he mentions (although I might need some clarifying on what he means exactly).

 

[five]

Holy Shit.....http://marcbeneteau.com/2009/07/carl-jung-writing-on-loneliness-meaning-and-purpose/

Pure Ni. I felt exactly the same way from my 20's onwards. It peaked at about 27. Before more grounding Te and Se's started developing further helping me communicate.

Never felt lonely though more just frustrated like I couldn't be understood.

INFJ without question.

 

[Mal12345]

Pure Ni. I felt exactly the same way from my 20's onwards. It peaked at about 27. Before more grounding Te and Se's started developing further helping me communicate.

Never felt lonely though more just frustrated like I couldn't be understood.

INFJ without question.

I don't know what "pure Ni" means. But this is what I wrote on the topic of Jung's type on Personalitynation.

I'm rather shamelessly arguing that Jung mistyped himself, and that he was an Ni thinker. And that his Se self-typing was simply based on the fact that he knew himself to be a natural scientist - his start and his end were both found in nature (human nature, his patients). He took up the data, built a theory on the data, and then applied it back to the "data."

However, what I'm saying is that, as a theory-builder, Jung had more than just Te going on. He searched externally for the possibilities in the data that enabled him to build his theory. But these possibilities - the functions - are not found in the data. They were his method for arranging the data systematically. Therefore I am describing the INTJ mentality.

There is definitely J-closure in building and creating a system, whether Kantian, Jungian, or Darwinian. P-non-closure (the playful theorist) never quite gets around to finishing it. The INTP prefers to juggle ideas endlessly. Some might argue that Kant was still creating before he died, and therefore he was an INTP, but that's only because he didn't live long enough to finish building the architectonic of pure reason. Theory-building is an INTJ trait.

Introverted Intuition Function
"Intuitive people process data through impressions, possibilities and meanings, so the Introverted Intuition function allows a person to have a sense about the future. It is the ability to grasp and get a sense of a pattern or plan. Information that is usually hard to understand and dissect is easily processed through Introverted Intuition."

The Ni function is obviously dependent upon having information to process - thus Jung's error in self-describing as Se.

That's part of it. I had other reasons for going with Ni that I don't need to quote here.

 

[ICUP]

Which I'm pretty sure that was published long before he gave this quote from the interview posted earlier in the thread (when he was 80+ yrs old), which suggests his sensing preference was not very strong:



It seems that Jung changed his mind on his type (because he did not view type as static) and/or people are interpreting these quotes to suit their view, which is often to make him their type. The other quotes you used ICUP don't strike me as ISTP in particular. I can relate to the reasoning in those myself, and I don't think Jung is INFP at all.

No, I don't think so either, and never claimed them to be. I was posting just because I found them interesting.... not to prove anything to anyone. Although I do find his views on state and freedom to be istp-y. If I said the same thing, many would just assume I was paranoid lol......
Just because I think it might be exactly like something I would write and stand for, does not rule out the possibility that another type might write it too, in other words. It just makes it a possibility.

What I'm getting from this is that he felt he was a Thinking type when young and then became an iNtuitive type as his iNtuition took over (which had always been strong though).

If people are arguing heavy use of the tertiary characterizing him (saying he was Ti-Ni or Ni-Ti), then you could also argue that when he made the quote about sensing he was Ti-Si, then as his iNtuition "grew" he came to use Ne more. There's no reason to assume the sensing he used was Se.

Of course it's a possibility to twist it around, but initially he did claim T-S as uppermost in him. I think that's enough to lead me to believe the answer is ISTP. Sure, we all change as we get older. We grow.

 

[INTP]

You guys should get more into his theories in order to quote properly. this unconscious N and F and type not being static doesent mean what you guys are trying to prove with those quotes. cba to explain those now

 

[entropie]

So Hitler and Jung were INFJ ? What would happen if I'd ask for Freud ?

Guess NTs aint that bad after all

 

[LaconicSesquipedalia]

I consider Freud to be an INTJ. He reminds me of Isaac Newton, only with more issues, and a, well, softer science to work with.

A lot of his theories scream Ni to me. Ti would have resulted in little to no out of left field theories and claims, which his work was replete with, which pretty much rules out xNTP. It would almost seem like empirical psychology and Ti would mix like oil and water, to me. The nature of his work seemed NT to me, I don't see much F in it. His regard for humanity is too pessimistic to be a healthy F, not psychotic enough to be an unhealthy INFJ.

I don't know enough about him to know if he is I or E, but from what I've seen of him on famous people MBTI laundry lists, is almost all INxx, if not all.

 

[entropie]

I consider Freud to be an INTJ. He reminds me of Isaac Newton, only with more issues, and a, well, softer science to work with.

A lot of his theories scream Ni to me. Ti would have resulted in little to no out of left field theories and claims, which his work was replete with, which pretty much rules out xNTP. It would almost seem like empirical psychology and Ti would mix like oil and water, to me. The nature of his work seemed NT to me, I don't see much F in it. His regard for humanity is too pessimistic to be a healthy F, not psychotic enough to be an unhealthy INFJ.

I don't know enough about him to know if he is I or E, but from what I've seen of him on famous people MBTI laundry lists, is almost all INxx, if not all.

Yea, I tend to give most of these types an intp or intj as well. The thing is the simple sum of all INFJs on this site does not tend to talk bullshit like Jung or Freud and to actively put people into categories. All the analysis going on regarding these heads from history always feels detached from reality and I trust my hunches

 

[LaconicSesquipedalia]

I'm not quite so confident in N dom, at least mine. I view it as a double-edged sword, with the potential for great creativity and insight, but also the potential to produce plenty moments, but also plenty

From what I've read over at INTJf, Ne dom seems to produce tinfoil hat stuff, while Ni seems to produce facepalm stuff lol.

 

[ReflecTcelfeR]

I'm not quite so confident in N dom, at least mine. I view it as a double-edged sword, with the potential for great creativity and insight, but also the potential to produce plenty moments, but also plenty

From what I've read over at INTJf, Ne dom seems to produce tinfoil hat stuff, while Ni seems to produce facepalm stuff lol.

Hahaha, yeah, a lot of re-inventing the wheel stuff. That's what I find myself doing.

 

[entropie]

I'm not quite so confident in N dom, at least mine. I view it as a double-edged sword, with the potential for great creativity and insight, but also the potential to produce plenty moments, but also plenty

From what I've read over at INTJf, Ne dom seems to produce tinfoil hat stuff, while Ni seems to produce facepalm stuff lol.

The amount of trust you can put into N can imo be measured by what you want to achieve. If you run thru the world trieing to logically explain everything, you are going to find your limits and are conspicious about N. Still logic will not suffice to explain love and hate and all the mysery and happiness it causes on the world. A fine tuned intuition or listening to what your body tells you in a situation can be a better guide than what your brain tells you.

I have experienced especially young americans on this site now for years showing a horrifieing demand for logic. Still its just playing along with what society demands from them, cause if you make sense in the capitalistic society, you can get anywhere. Still I dont think that logic is the goal, I rather thing that wisdom is the way to personal happiness and said one is an ability which is often completly blocked by logic or emotions and is a thing that holds a fine balance between the two.

I have no clue what I wanted to tell you I forgot midway

Hahaha, yeah, a lot of re-inventing the wheel stuff. That's what I find myself doing.

Re-inventing stuff over and over again gives you a more fine-tuned understanding of the inner workings of a thing. That knowledge some day will be what you need as basics to invent something new