Visual Reading of Cognitive Types

[reckful]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION]

Wasn't Carl Jung even in that quote referring more to groups and generalizations than individuals in the first place though ? As you probably know he said.

"Through compensation there arise secondary characters, or types, which present a picture that is extraordinarily hard to decipher, so difficult, indeed that one is even inclined to deny the existence of types in general and to believe only in individual differences".

That is Jung clearly thought characteristics around extroversion and introversion could be seen in a more generalized way, but when it comes to individuals their type is not so easy to tell apart, pretty much exactly what I was saying up there.

I think saying "Jung had a very correct understanding of the psyche" may have been wrong on his part depending exactly what he meant, but it's not on the level your talking about.

Your quote about compensation from the unconscious resulting in complications that might cause someone to be "inclined to deny the existence of types in general and to believe only in individual differences" comes from the Introduction to Psychological Types. But the book itself, of course, constitutes Jung's counterargument to the effect that there are indeed "types in general."

At the start of Chapter X, after describing "those reserved, inscrutable, rather shy" introverts "who form the strongest possible contrast to the open, sociable, jovial, or at least friendly and approachable" extraverts (as quoted in my last post), Jung continued:

One is naturally inclined, at first, to regard such differences as mere idiosyncrasies of character peculiar to individuals. But anyone with a thorough knowledge of human nature will soon discover that the contrast is by no means a matter of isolated individual instances but of typical attitudes which are far more common than one with limited psychological experience would assume. Indeed, as the preceding chapters may have shown, it is a fundamental contrast, sometimes quite clear, sometimes obscured, but always apparent when one is dealing with individuals whose personality is in any way pronounced.

There's no question that Jung believed that more people were essentially in the middle on E/I than were significantly extraverted or introverted but, assuming you were dealing with someone "whose personality is in any way pronounced," Jung said that the E/I difference involved "such a striking contrast" that whether such a person was an extravert or an introvert "becomes quite obvious even to the layman once it has been pointed out."

Neither I nor the CT folks are claiming that Morrissey's an ambivert, so it sounds like we can set that possible complication aside. Assuming we agree that he has a sufficiently "pronounced" personality to be typable, the issue is whether, based on Jung's conception of the "striking contrast" between extraverts and introverts, Morrissey's relatively "pronounced" personality is an extraverted one or an introverted one.

And if at least part of the confusion here arises from the fact that Auburn's notion of what Te-doms (and/or extraverts) are like is substantially different from Jung's, where are Auburn's descriptions of the types? And if those descriptions don't exist yet, what good does it do for the CT folks to be identifying people as "Te-Ni types" if nobody else really knows what that means?

 

[chaoticbrain]

[MENTION=18736]reckful[/MENTION]

Jung's comment in the introduction was not referring to people who were ambiverts, It was trying to establish that someone can be an extrovert despite the fact that they have an introverted side.

Not that the morissey thing is such an important detail, but he has been noted to have heavy Fi many times from us, as noted here. (at bottom page).

http://www.pinterest.com/filippomedas/teni-cognitivetypes/

CT does departure from Jung in many different ways, the entire concept of the "inferior function" is completely incompatible with CT. The reason why I think it makes sense to use Jung's terms, is that we have come across enough evidence from visual cues, Te's empiricism, quickness to conclude etc, being paired with Fi tension, Fi-snarl, emoting 'in' on yourself, not catering to social dynamics etc. At a 1:1 ratio, that one could conclude it's the phenomenon that Jung was trying to describe.

I do think maybe erifrail isn't clear enough sometimes in the extent to which it is different from Jung, and I'm not sure if he would even have the same opinion anymore.

 

[Thursday]

thats damn good. Research well done.

 

[LuciJr]

VIDEO: INFJs, INTPs, ENTPs, INFPs, INTJs, ENTJs, ESFPs, ISTJs facial expressions.

INFJs

---

 

[LuciJr]

INTPs

---

 

[LuciJr]

ENTPs

---

 

[LuciJr]

INFPs

---

 

[LuciJr]

INTJs

---

 

[LuciJr]

ENTJs

---

 

[LuciJr]

ESFPs

---

 

[LuciJr]

ISTJs

---

 

[LuciJr]

Explanations of cognitive functions and their outward appearence

 

[Solar Plexus]

Hmm...that is eerily accurate. I've always figured the eye toggling was related to Ne. I assumed that looking off into space was also a result of Ne, but apparently Si is responsible for the upward gazing, as well as concentrated scowling. I never would've attributed the breathy/airy and matter-of-fact articulation to cognitive functions, but I guess that explains a lot. I've been noticing lately how different most people's facial expressions are compared to my own when I'm out in public. Interesting stuffs.

 

[INTP]

I watched some of these with open mind a while back, but quite quickly noticed that many of the people were mistyped and there were a lot of bullshit on these. It seems that its more like wanting to see the connections and thus making false associations between the expressions and type.

 

[digesthisickness]

Yeah, if not for the fact that they're so ridiculously hard to grasp information-wise, I'd be offended at the perpetuation of wrong information being sent out into the world. As it is, good luck being smarter after watching those.

 

[Riva]

Thanks for sharing. This is great.

I'll go through the videos and comment.

 

[highlander]

I watched some of these with open mind a while back, but quite quickly noticed that many of the people were mistyped and there were a lot of bullshit on these. It seems that its more like wanting to see the connections and thus making false associations between the expressions and type.

Who do you think they mistyped?

 

[INTP]

Who do you think they mistyped?

I dont remember anymore, its been months(or was it like a year ago when they started making the videos?) since i watched the videos, but there were quite few of them.

 

[Solar Plexus]

In regards to the "Pained Expression" of FiNe and the Si scowling, and sorrowful expression of Fi, I have found that deliberately displaying a slight smile can help avoid misperceptions that I am angry or upset. People generally don't want to be around someone who is emitting negative energy or appears to be. For the longest time, I didn't realize that others perceived me that way, even when I was feeling fine, and couldn't understand why people reacted to me the way they did. Appearing more friendly and approachable has had a profoundly positive effect on my life in the workplace and socially. Afterall, most people can't get inside of your head and read your mind...nor do they want to if it seems negative. All they have to judge you by is how you present yourself to the world. I don't see it as wearing a mask or being fake as much as making a conscious effort to be more expressive and overcome unnecessary miscommunications. Plus, a smile is often a hallmark of a confident person who is happy and self-content, both universally attractive traits.

Another thing I've noticed is that when I'm engaged in a conversation, I tend to radiate a certain intensity in my gaze and perhaps convey a sense of intimacy (not sexual), which may be off-putting to some people who aren't used to it. It seems like most people are more detached in their conversations. I have to consciously regulate my eye contact to keep people at ease.

 

[Riva]

The girl in the ENTP video @1.55 is really cute and I loved her body language.

Hehe