Vendrah
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2017
- Messages
- 1,977
- MBTI Type
- NP
- Enneagram
- 952
Ok, this title got many stuff because this article is gonna be big! And there are a lot of things here...
I just recently had “figured†Jung typology, so I had decided to re-read some of the types. And after I had done reading almost all psychological type book – almost because I skip a few paragraphs because I got bored about Jung analyzing myth, history, art, etc... I had re-read Ne and I might write about that too, but this first!
So, I think that I should tell what my theory is. Well, it is more of a hypothesis, to be honest, but I rather call it theory! My theory about the Si type is that mother Nature had killed all highly differentiated Si types – reasons are the long explanation. Ok, I had actually read about stuff on the internet that are serious and have figured that this whole type is possibly a disorder (PS: I am speaking of Jung Si, not the Si=SJ that is spread out there, so Im not talking about the traditionalist ISTJ/ISFJ, but proper Jung Si). You know, that coming for a clear NP and probably Ne-dom might be subjective and biased on a bad way, however this does not affects the Ne type positively. Just a wild example, let’s say that we categorize people by their ingest of water, let me say it, my water type. There are three types of people on the water type: a) The ones that hates water and does intake very little water, b) the ones who ingest huge amount of water – something like 3-5 liters a day, c) and the third type which takes a moderate amount of water. Well, all people from the type a, the one which does not intake much water, are all dead on this typology. They had died of thirst. However, their death does bring zero advantages for those who have a high intake. And those with a high intake can still die by exaggerating on the water, but it will take them a lot to do so. So, this is an example where one type is dead but the opposite of it does not gather any sort of advantage. For Si and Ne in this theory of mine works in the same way, the opposite of what kills Si does not give much advantage to Ne.
But first things first. There are some aspects where the reader needs to be reminded about Jung E/I and N/S and its differences from MBTI – and I am not judging if Jung is “wrong or right†here and I invite you to do the same while reading Jung Si and Ne descriptions. Jung E/I is has N/S characteristics from MBTI, specially these:
- Abstract VS Concrete: On MBTI, concrete relates to sensing while abstract relates to intuition. In Jung, concrete relates to Extroversion and abstract relates to Introversion.
- Experiential VS Theoretical: In MBTI, Experiential is Sensing related, while Theoretical is Intuition related. In Jung, Experiential is related to Extroversion, while Theoretical does not really have a clear inclination to Thinking or Introversion and might be both (so the Ti type would be the Theoretical type).
- Internal vs External: This is a good reminder that in MBTI, Internal vs External seems to be assigned to N/S if refer to things, and to I/E if refers to people, so External orientation towards things is Sensing and External orientation towards people is Extroversion. In Jung, Internal vs External, either things or people or anything in general, still belongs to E/I.
- Subjective vs Objective: I don’t know if there is any correspondence on MBTI, but on Jung subjective is from Introversion and Objective is from Extraversion.
- Imagination vs Realistic: That is N/S on both.
- Practical vs Conceptual: Sensing vs Intuition on both.
- Traditional vs Original: Actually, the opposite of original is not necessarily traditional and the opposite of traditional is not necessarily original. Traditional description is very friendly to the undifferentiated type on Jung typology, rather than associated with Sensing.
So, Ne type is Experiential, Concrete, Imaginative, Intuitive, Conceptual, External, Objective. While Si type is Abstract, Realistic, Sensation, Practical, Internal, Subjective. While the EN type on MBTI is Abstract, Theoretical, External to people and Internal to things, Imaginative, Conceptual, Original, while the IS type is Concrete, Experiential, Internal on people & External on things, Realistic, Practical, Traditional. So, yeah, IS and Si goes quite differently and Im not actually telling all the differences, but the core important for now. Because you need to understand that Jung Si is abstract rather than concrete and internal in general. So, let’s read the Si text with me assisting the read almost every paragraph. The start describes Sensing crossed with Introversion (Sensation with the introverted attitude), with the type description coming later:
First thing about Jung Si is that it is sometimes at first read associated with art, however Jung never associated art with Si – rather, Jung uses art and painting to explain the Si type. When different painters look at the same scenario, they draw the scenario in slightly different ways. The same scenario looks different in every painting – because every painting has a subjective bias. The art itself is still sensation, the paintings still represent the scenario or landscape in a sensing fashion, however it is no longer “truly sensing†but rather a distorted view of the scenario – distorted by subjectivity. It is still sensing anyway.
Jung explains that subjective perception has elements of perception that is not found at all in the object – object here means actual reality. The subjectiveness on Jung has introverted elements, and on Jung the introverted type has dispositions and presuppositions of being highly influenced with the collective unconscious (well, that is a too long concept to explain it here), and that brings “images†that comes within from the unconscious, and these images brings primordial ideas and mythological images. Ok, but what? Well, to explain the collective unconscious on a quick and non-mystical way, it is as if the genes are able to bring images and myths on the unconscious and print them on the painting – you can understand the genes as one of the causes of differences between the picture and reality, so the person subjectiveness comes from patterns from the genes – or images from the collective unconscious. These images and myths are full of meaning.
The decisive thing for the Si-dom is not the reality of the object, but rather the reality from the images of the collective unconscious, or, as I like to compare with, the images of the genes. Notice that this genes and collective unconscious are a subjective interpretation of mine, but an interpretation that is created to draw a parallel between science and the collective unconscious rather than explaining it on the mythical and spiritual way, because it gets easier to understand this way – I know the spiritual explanation of it but explaining by Genes is easier. So, the Si-dom decisive thing is not the reality of the world, but rather the internal reality – which contains images and the psycho internal world. Or mirror psycho internal world. It is mirror because the Genes are shaped by the reality on the million-year-old evolutionary process of natural selection. It is as if the genes contains some sapient old knowledge – a knowledge that mirrors reality because they were shaped by it. So, the million-year-old consciousness contains patterns and images that had helped human beings to survive and thrive on nature, but this pattern and images from the Genes are still internal, yet they are very old pattern, so it is as if they contain a very old sapient knowledge, that is bring to life by the unconscious. So as Jung did a figure of speech, I made it either, but instead of using genetics as a figure. These pattern are all dependent on events that happened before the person was born – by thousands of years before (the process that shaped the genes: Natural selection). This is the age-old subjective experience printed on the unconscious and it is linked to a distant past. I didn’t really grasp where the future part comes in here. So, now comes to the type description:
Jung irrational means being lead to an N/S function. Whereas Se doms are external, they are guided by by the intensity of objective influences – in clearer words, Se doms are guided by the intensity of the environment influences, whereas introverted sensation is guided by the intensity of the subjective sensation excited by the objective stimulus – guided by the intensity of the internal psyche and internal images excited by the environment stimulus. And here is the most bold part for my point after this explanation: “Obviously therefore, no proportional relation exists between object and sensation, but one that is apparently quite unpredictable and arbitraryâ€. Basically, for the Si type there is no proportional relation between the objective – which is a Jungian word for environment and indirectly for what is real in an external sense and outside the person, being what is real depending on the context of being scenarios, other people, etc... - and sensation, which is sensing per se, but the relationship of sensation and the object – or sensing and the real environment – is quite unpredictable and arbitrary. That is actually repeated a few lines later in other words.. “Normally the object is not consciously devalued in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it and immediately replaced by a subjective reaction no longer related to the reality of the objectâ€. What will make an impression, or what is going to be sensed by the Si type, that is subjective, and what will not can never be seem in advance, and from the outside, because the subjectiveness of the Si type adds properties to the object that are from the internal reality of the Si type internal psyche and internal images, which is not something that can be seem by an external observer. Then Jung explains that the if there were a way of this subjectiveness to be expressed fully, the irrationality of this type would be clear, and then, as an example, he mentions art again, but since the artist is an exception, this type can never fully express her/himself. Then, Jung explains that this type might even question why some parts of reality exists at all, since all the essential – which for this type is the internal reality of the psyche and images – still goes on happening without reality.
Jung explains that the effect of the object, or the external reality, do not penetrate the subject – the internal person’s reality – at all, because the subject content that comes from the unconscious intercepts the effect of the object – the effect of the external reality. With a stronger unconscious for this case, the subjective component of sensation (the internal psyche and internal images) becomes so alive that it almost obscures the influence of the object – the influence of the environment external reality. Yeah, this start to sound a little crazy, but if you re-read carefully it is as I’m saying, and this is one of the reasons this part of Jung is so difficult to grasp and understand. In more pathological cases, the person cannot distinguish what is real and what are images that comes from their head (“which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perceptionâ€). Even when the unconscious image and model (which is sort of the internal images and model) and reality completely matches, the person will still follow the unconscious model rather than reality. And then, Jung describes when the influence of the object – external environment – does only partially penetrates the subject, it is always adjusted conform the internal images – what is taken as too low is raised, what is too high is get down, and etc..and anything out of the ordinary (out of what is expected by the internal images) reduced to the “right formulaâ€, which here is the unconscious images, in order to keep the influence from external reality within the necessary bounds (necessary is dictated by the “right formulaâ€). Then Jung seems to jump to a situation out of nowhere, but actually, this re-adjustment of reality of this type makes this type surprisingly more “tolerant†of aggressiveness of others, since their aggressiveness is apprehended as softer than actually it is, and such men allow themselves to be abused – actually, there is one interesting thing to note here. Despite this being the type description, Jung still explained Sensation with introverted orientation until this far to finally even mention someone from that type directly. This is quite different from any other types, which Jung starts mentioning persons – even using he or she pronouns every time or stating right away if the type has more females than males or vice versa. But here was different: Jung kept explaining the “mechanismâ€, Sensation with the introverted attitude, and only on the middle of the explanation went to the type, just to go back at the explanation. This really gives me an impression that Jung did not had much experiences with people from this type – as if this type is barely real for Jung.
Well, the first paragraph just tells you that this type cannot be understood by the others and perhaps not by himself, partially because the thinking and feeling functions, being less differentiated, are more primitive, more archaic (the interesting thing is that the same can be said for other 7 types non-clear auxiliary functions even though their “archaicness†was not mentioned with this emphasis). In the second part, since the internal images are related to myths and this type sensation is on the internal image, this type lives on a mythological world. This type is isolated and the banality of the world – and world here means the world on a subjective lens – and the world was made unconsciously archaic by this type. Archaic here actually means old, remember on the beginning where there was the “million-year†unconscious thing? Well, the internal images are very old and so they are “archaicâ€.
This last part is about the unconscious of this type – this is not a part where I feel much safety on Jung’s theory but this is, apparently, what we usually know as “inferior Ne†description. Basically, the inferior (or archaicisized) Ne has a flair for all the ambiguous, shadowy, sordid and dangerous possibility in the background – which sort of might create of what we understand as paranoia? Perhaps? Well... This is it, anyway. The Si type description.
Now, it really did come to me that this type can barely survive. What I mean here is, basically, the Si type replaces the object with the subject, or, this type replaces the external environment reality with the internal psyche reality, and in general terms that is very alike hallucination – it is really hallucination if we stop to think of (ok, being rigorously, it is actually illusion rather than hallucination). This type is alienated from the external reality, that is switched for the internal reality. What happens here is that Sensation no longer reads the external environment, but instead the actual sensing that comes from the environment is being replaced by the internal psyche with internal signs that doesn’t exist on the reality, and, you know, for the this to form a type, it must be habitual, not episodic. This replacement of sensing signals from reality, we can sort of say the brain signals related to sensation such as vision, taste, smell, etc..., with signals that comes from the within psyche, is very likely an alternative description of hallucination. But the thing here becomes quite dangerous when the person is basically not even aware of what is real or what is not (“which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perceptionâ€), because, you know, you can’t really proper survive if you can’t tell what is real or what is not – so, as a random example, a tiger arriving close to you (supposing you are now a pronounced Si type) on a dangerous forest might be perceived as a cutie cat probably until the last seconds of your life. This does not happens with Ne, since Ne is empirical (its Ne in Jung, not ENXX) and intuition does give motivations to go beyond the object, but intuition does not replace the whole perception of reality, it keeps it. Ni, for other instance, is less affected. Despite Ni being very internal centred – the most internal centred of the 8 types along with this one – there is not a replacement of Sensing with the internal reality, so at least the Ni type is way more likely to distinguish what is real and what is not, even though what is real might be quite suppressed and ignored.
This strong effect of this type not being able to distinguish reality from the internal psyche makes high differentiation unsustainable (and this affects the Ni cousin a bit), so the Si type from Jung on a highly differentiated form would not make it through reality – at least this is what I argue. I had read the wikipedia articles of delusion (Delusion - Wikipedia), illusion (Illusion - Wikipedia), hallucination(Hallucination - Wikipedia) and psychosis (Psychosis - Wikipedia), and there are many elements of this type on these pages. “Psychosis is an abnormal condition of the mind that results in difficulties determining what is real and what is not real. Symptoms may include delusions and hallucinations. Other symptoms may include incoherent speech and behavior that is inappropriate for the situation. There may also be sleep problems, social withdrawal, lack of motivation, and difficulties carrying out daily activities. Psychosis can have serious outcomes.†(Wikipedia,2021). This describes this type very well: The incoherent speech is actually explained by Jung and the inappropriate behavior either, the social withdrawal that is expected from the introversion.
A delusion is a fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence. As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, confabulation, dogma, illusion, or some other misleading effects of perception.†(wikipedia on delusion) - This also hits this type as a pathology, since the dogma is more related to Extraverted Thinking, whereas this case is not related to people being lied to or believing in lies. Ruling these exceptions out, the delusion here is a fixed belief not amenable to change in the light of conflicting evidence because, for the person, the evidence is always replaced with the internal content that does not belong to reality.
“An illusion is a distortion of the senses, which can reveal how the human brain normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. Although illusions distort our perception of reality, they are generally shared by most people.
(...)
Some illusions are based on general assumptions the brain makes during perception. These assumptions are made using organizational principles (e.g., Gestalt theory), an individual's capacity for depth perception and motion perception, and perceptual constancy. Other illusions occur because of biological sensory structures within the human body or conditions outside the body within one's physical environment.
The term illusion refers to a specific form of sensory distortion. Unlike a hallucination, which is a distortion in the absence of a stimulus, an illusion describes a misinterpretation of a true sensation. For example, hearing voices regardless of the environment would be a hallucination, whereas hearing voices in the sound of running water (or another auditory source) would be an illusion.†(Wikipedia on illusion) - Si is about sensory distortion! However, there are two things... The sensory distortion not only can bring illusion but can also bring hallucination, pretty much both:
“A mild form of hallucination is known as a disturbance, and can occur in most of the senses above. These may be things like seeing movement in peripheral vision, or hearing faint noises or voices. Auditory hallucinations are very common in schizophrenia. They may be benevolent (telling the subject good things about themselves) or malicious, cursing the subject, etc. Auditory hallucinations of the malicious type are frequently heard for example people talking about the subject behind their back.†(Wikipedia on hallucination)
Remember this: “Actually he lives in a mythological world, where men, animals, locomotives, houses, rivers, and mountains appear either as benevolent deities or as malevolent demons.â€. Its strikingly similar.
Another interesting thing is to note that all types can use Sensing on an introverted orientation except the Ne-doms in theory. This partially where the human “subjectiveness†applies, and on Jung the only exception is actually Se-dom and Ne-dom (even though I would say that Ne-dom is not that much immune). So, a Si general example is Vierordt's law (Vierordt's law): - Wikipedia “Vierordt's law is "a robust phenomenon in time estimation research that has been observed with different time estimation methods". It states that, retrospectively, "short" intervals of time tend to be overestimated, and "long" intervals of time tend to be underestimated†– this links to this - “The too low is raised a little, the too high is loweredâ€.
There are also other distortions related to this type on other typologies. What I mean is, if we read the hybrid of MBTI and cognitive functions (which is what most people from former data types themselves and still do) and the enneagram connections, we see that, while Ne and Se are mostly accommodated by Type 7, Te mostly accommodated on Type 3 and 8, Fe very accommodated on Type 2, Fi mostly accommodated on Type 4 and a little bit on 9, Ti being quite accommodated on Type 5, Ni is more spread and partially accommodated on Type 4, while Si is accommodated on Type 6 and partially on Type 9 (and there are some traces of Si type on both, even though Type 9 is “very stableâ€), that is basically the most undifferentiated type of all the enneagram types. Also, on MBTI, Si was very changed, and the Si you read out there that is mostly SJ rather than Jung Si, does posses traits from Thinking, specially Extraverted Thinking (relations with rules, procedures, etc...) and also traits from the undifferentiated type (traditional, loyal and quite low creativity – these characteristics are from the undifferentiated type). I think a part of this is because on the data most Si users taken into account were all less differentiated, and that cause the Si type on MBTI to be transformed and to absorb and abduct traits from the undifferentiated type on MBTI – since for MBTI everyone need to have a type – and to take Thinking and Feeling, specially the former, traits, since with less differentiation of the primary the auxiliary function (for a pure Si type or any of the other 7 types the auxiliary and tertiary are undifferentiated, mix, so it is as if there are two auxiliary function with four possible attitudes) plays a significant larger role. I think Te was more captured because of two things: First, because the less differentiation also has to happen on the E/I attitude, so that is why the ‘e’, and second, today’s data say there are more ISTJs than ISFJs world-wide, so probably for the Si type there were more Si-f than Si-t for the sample, which makes a biased towards thinking, thus making the Te type having traits abducted by Si, while there is also the problem that the opposite of the dogmatism of the intellectual formula of the Te type is the “open-mindness†and openness to experience of Ne, which is sort of a Jung flaw. Another aspect is that the MBTI might want to not generate any unhealthy patterns or unhealthy types, so, basically, any combination of Sensing/Sensation with internal and internalization leads to this pattern, which might incentive them to remove the internal vs external orientation or rather restrict it into only people and social related theme (isolated vs social replacement) and this could be a factor that made the MBTI E/I to be very social vs not social oriented while losing other Jung E/I aspects that are not related to socialization.
So, yeah, “my caseâ€, or rather my theory, is quite strong here, this might be the biggest flaw on Jung once you understood it, however, to be honest, it is only a flaw if you are expecting all types to be equally healthy in the first place – if that premise doesn’t exist, then that is not, exactly, a flaw. But, yeah, it is sort of weird having one type as being mostly unhealthy if pronounced. And this whole factor actually interferes into how MBTI was constructed – this creates a hole on the typology, and this hole does have interference with the correlations and statistical construct of the MBTI, since Myers was not expecting one of the types barely existing, and this might had changed the construction of N/S and E/I on MBTI, specially because this was probably the cause of the appearance of the facet ‘tradition’ on Sensing, while Sensation and Sensing as functions got nothing to do with tradition at all. And all of it makes me question if Jung was really “wrong†into assigning empirical and external orientation in general to E/I rather than N/S as well...
I just recently had “figured†Jung typology, so I had decided to re-read some of the types. And after I had done reading almost all psychological type book – almost because I skip a few paragraphs because I got bored about Jung analyzing myth, history, art, etc... I had re-read Ne and I might write about that too, but this first!
So, I think that I should tell what my theory is. Well, it is more of a hypothesis, to be honest, but I rather call it theory! My theory about the Si type is that mother Nature had killed all highly differentiated Si types – reasons are the long explanation. Ok, I had actually read about stuff on the internet that are serious and have figured that this whole type is possibly a disorder (PS: I am speaking of Jung Si, not the Si=SJ that is spread out there, so Im not talking about the traditionalist ISTJ/ISFJ, but proper Jung Si). You know, that coming for a clear NP and probably Ne-dom might be subjective and biased on a bad way, however this does not affects the Ne type positively. Just a wild example, let’s say that we categorize people by their ingest of water, let me say it, my water type. There are three types of people on the water type: a) The ones that hates water and does intake very little water, b) the ones who ingest huge amount of water – something like 3-5 liters a day, c) and the third type which takes a moderate amount of water. Well, all people from the type a, the one which does not intake much water, are all dead on this typology. They had died of thirst. However, their death does bring zero advantages for those who have a high intake. And those with a high intake can still die by exaggerating on the water, but it will take them a lot to do so. So, this is an example where one type is dead but the opposite of it does not gather any sort of advantage. For Si and Ne in this theory of mine works in the same way, the opposite of what kills Si does not give much advantage to Ne.
But first things first. There are some aspects where the reader needs to be reminded about Jung E/I and N/S and its differences from MBTI – and I am not judging if Jung is “wrong or right†here and I invite you to do the same while reading Jung Si and Ne descriptions. Jung E/I is has N/S characteristics from MBTI, specially these:
- Abstract VS Concrete: On MBTI, concrete relates to sensing while abstract relates to intuition. In Jung, concrete relates to Extroversion and abstract relates to Introversion.
- Experiential VS Theoretical: In MBTI, Experiential is Sensing related, while Theoretical is Intuition related. In Jung, Experiential is related to Extroversion, while Theoretical does not really have a clear inclination to Thinking or Introversion and might be both (so the Ti type would be the Theoretical type).
- Internal vs External: This is a good reminder that in MBTI, Internal vs External seems to be assigned to N/S if refer to things, and to I/E if refers to people, so External orientation towards things is Sensing and External orientation towards people is Extroversion. In Jung, Internal vs External, either things or people or anything in general, still belongs to E/I.
- Subjective vs Objective: I don’t know if there is any correspondence on MBTI, but on Jung subjective is from Introversion and Objective is from Extraversion.
- Imagination vs Realistic: That is N/S on both.
- Practical vs Conceptual: Sensing vs Intuition on both.
- Traditional vs Original: Actually, the opposite of original is not necessarily traditional and the opposite of traditional is not necessarily original. Traditional description is very friendly to the undifferentiated type on Jung typology, rather than associated with Sensing.
So, Ne type is Experiential, Concrete, Imaginative, Intuitive, Conceptual, External, Objective. While Si type is Abstract, Realistic, Sensation, Practical, Internal, Subjective. While the EN type on MBTI is Abstract, Theoretical, External to people and Internal to things, Imaginative, Conceptual, Original, while the IS type is Concrete, Experiential, Internal on people & External on things, Realistic, Practical, Traditional. So, yeah, IS and Si goes quite differently and Im not actually telling all the differences, but the core important for now. Because you need to understand that Jung Si is abstract rather than concrete and internal in general. So, let’s read the Si text with me assisting the read almost every paragraph. The start describes Sensing crossed with Introversion (Sensation with the introverted attitude), with the type description coming later:
First thing about Jung Si is that it is sometimes at first read associated with art, however Jung never associated art with Si – rather, Jung uses art and painting to explain the Si type. When different painters look at the same scenario, they draw the scenario in slightly different ways. The same scenario looks different in every painting – because every painting has a subjective bias. The art itself is still sensation, the paintings still represent the scenario or landscape in a sensing fashion, however it is no longer “truly sensing†but rather a distorted view of the scenario – distorted by subjectivity. It is still sensing anyway.
Jung explains that subjective perception has elements of perception that is not found at all in the object – object here means actual reality. The subjectiveness on Jung has introverted elements, and on Jung the introverted type has dispositions and presuppositions of being highly influenced with the collective unconscious (well, that is a too long concept to explain it here), and that brings “images†that comes within from the unconscious, and these images brings primordial ideas and mythological images. Ok, but what? Well, to explain the collective unconscious on a quick and non-mystical way, it is as if the genes are able to bring images and myths on the unconscious and print them on the painting – you can understand the genes as one of the causes of differences between the picture and reality, so the person subjectiveness comes from patterns from the genes – or images from the collective unconscious. These images and myths are full of meaning.
The decisive thing for the Si-dom is not the reality of the object, but rather the reality from the images of the collective unconscious, or, as I like to compare with, the images of the genes. Notice that this genes and collective unconscious are a subjective interpretation of mine, but an interpretation that is created to draw a parallel between science and the collective unconscious rather than explaining it on the mythical and spiritual way, because it gets easier to understand this way – I know the spiritual explanation of it but explaining by Genes is easier. So, the Si-dom decisive thing is not the reality of the world, but rather the internal reality – which contains images and the psycho internal world. Or mirror psycho internal world. It is mirror because the Genes are shaped by the reality on the million-year-old evolutionary process of natural selection. It is as if the genes contains some sapient old knowledge – a knowledge that mirrors reality because they were shaped by it. So, the million-year-old consciousness contains patterns and images that had helped human beings to survive and thrive on nature, but this pattern and images from the Genes are still internal, yet they are very old pattern, so it is as if they contain a very old sapient knowledge, that is bring to life by the unconscious. So as Jung did a figure of speech, I made it either, but instead of using genetics as a figure. These pattern are all dependent on events that happened before the person was born – by thousands of years before (the process that shaped the genes: Natural selection). This is the age-old subjective experience printed on the unconscious and it is linked to a distant past. I didn’t really grasp where the future part comes in here. So, now comes to the type description:
Jung irrational means being lead to an N/S function. Whereas Se doms are external, they are guided by by the intensity of objective influences – in clearer words, Se doms are guided by the intensity of the environment influences, whereas introverted sensation is guided by the intensity of the subjective sensation excited by the objective stimulus – guided by the intensity of the internal psyche and internal images excited by the environment stimulus. And here is the most bold part for my point after this explanation: “Obviously therefore, no proportional relation exists between object and sensation, but one that is apparently quite unpredictable and arbitraryâ€. Basically, for the Si type there is no proportional relation between the objective – which is a Jungian word for environment and indirectly for what is real in an external sense and outside the person, being what is real depending on the context of being scenarios, other people, etc... - and sensation, which is sensing per se, but the relationship of sensation and the object – or sensing and the real environment – is quite unpredictable and arbitrary. That is actually repeated a few lines later in other words.. “Normally the object is not consciously devalued in the least, but its stimulus is removed from it and immediately replaced by a subjective reaction no longer related to the reality of the objectâ€. What will make an impression, or what is going to be sensed by the Si type, that is subjective, and what will not can never be seem in advance, and from the outside, because the subjectiveness of the Si type adds properties to the object that are from the internal reality of the Si type internal psyche and internal images, which is not something that can be seem by an external observer. Then Jung explains that the if there were a way of this subjectiveness to be expressed fully, the irrationality of this type would be clear, and then, as an example, he mentions art again, but since the artist is an exception, this type can never fully express her/himself. Then, Jung explains that this type might even question why some parts of reality exists at all, since all the essential – which for this type is the internal reality of the psyche and images – still goes on happening without reality.
Jung explains that the effect of the object, or the external reality, do not penetrate the subject – the internal person’s reality – at all, because the subject content that comes from the unconscious intercepts the effect of the object – the effect of the external reality. With a stronger unconscious for this case, the subjective component of sensation (the internal psyche and internal images) becomes so alive that it almost obscures the influence of the object – the influence of the environment external reality. Yeah, this start to sound a little crazy, but if you re-read carefully it is as I’m saying, and this is one of the reasons this part of Jung is so difficult to grasp and understand. In more pathological cases, the person cannot distinguish what is real and what are images that comes from their head (“which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perceptionâ€). Even when the unconscious image and model (which is sort of the internal images and model) and reality completely matches, the person will still follow the unconscious model rather than reality. And then, Jung describes when the influence of the object – external environment – does only partially penetrates the subject, it is always adjusted conform the internal images – what is taken as too low is raised, what is too high is get down, and etc..and anything out of the ordinary (out of what is expected by the internal images) reduced to the “right formulaâ€, which here is the unconscious images, in order to keep the influence from external reality within the necessary bounds (necessary is dictated by the “right formulaâ€). Then Jung seems to jump to a situation out of nowhere, but actually, this re-adjustment of reality of this type makes this type surprisingly more “tolerant†of aggressiveness of others, since their aggressiveness is apprehended as softer than actually it is, and such men allow themselves to be abused – actually, there is one interesting thing to note here. Despite this being the type description, Jung still explained Sensation with introverted orientation until this far to finally even mention someone from that type directly. This is quite different from any other types, which Jung starts mentioning persons – even using he or she pronouns every time or stating right away if the type has more females than males or vice versa. But here was different: Jung kept explaining the “mechanismâ€, Sensation with the introverted attitude, and only on the middle of the explanation went to the type, just to go back at the explanation. This really gives me an impression that Jung did not had much experiences with people from this type – as if this type is barely real for Jung.
Well, the first paragraph just tells you that this type cannot be understood by the others and perhaps not by himself, partially because the thinking and feeling functions, being less differentiated, are more primitive, more archaic (the interesting thing is that the same can be said for other 7 types non-clear auxiliary functions even though their “archaicness†was not mentioned with this emphasis). In the second part, since the internal images are related to myths and this type sensation is on the internal image, this type lives on a mythological world. This type is isolated and the banality of the world – and world here means the world on a subjective lens – and the world was made unconsciously archaic by this type. Archaic here actually means old, remember on the beginning where there was the “million-year†unconscious thing? Well, the internal images are very old and so they are “archaicâ€.
This last part is about the unconscious of this type – this is not a part where I feel much safety on Jung’s theory but this is, apparently, what we usually know as “inferior Ne†description. Basically, the inferior (or archaicisized) Ne has a flair for all the ambiguous, shadowy, sordid and dangerous possibility in the background – which sort of might create of what we understand as paranoia? Perhaps? Well... This is it, anyway. The Si type description.
Now, it really did come to me that this type can barely survive. What I mean here is, basically, the Si type replaces the object with the subject, or, this type replaces the external environment reality with the internal psyche reality, and in general terms that is very alike hallucination – it is really hallucination if we stop to think of (ok, being rigorously, it is actually illusion rather than hallucination). This type is alienated from the external reality, that is switched for the internal reality. What happens here is that Sensation no longer reads the external environment, but instead the actual sensing that comes from the environment is being replaced by the internal psyche with internal signs that doesn’t exist on the reality, and, you know, for the this to form a type, it must be habitual, not episodic. This replacement of sensing signals from reality, we can sort of say the brain signals related to sensation such as vision, taste, smell, etc..., with signals that comes from the within psyche, is very likely an alternative description of hallucination. But the thing here becomes quite dangerous when the person is basically not even aware of what is real or what is not (“which in pathological cases goes so far that he is no longer able to distinguish between the real object and the subjective perceptionâ€), because, you know, you can’t really proper survive if you can’t tell what is real or what is not – so, as a random example, a tiger arriving close to you (supposing you are now a pronounced Si type) on a dangerous forest might be perceived as a cutie cat probably until the last seconds of your life. This does not happens with Ne, since Ne is empirical (its Ne in Jung, not ENXX) and intuition does give motivations to go beyond the object, but intuition does not replace the whole perception of reality, it keeps it. Ni, for other instance, is less affected. Despite Ni being very internal centred – the most internal centred of the 8 types along with this one – there is not a replacement of Sensing with the internal reality, so at least the Ni type is way more likely to distinguish what is real and what is not, even though what is real might be quite suppressed and ignored.
This strong effect of this type not being able to distinguish reality from the internal psyche makes high differentiation unsustainable (and this affects the Ni cousin a bit), so the Si type from Jung on a highly differentiated form would not make it through reality – at least this is what I argue. I had read the wikipedia articles of delusion (Delusion - Wikipedia), illusion (Illusion - Wikipedia), hallucination(Hallucination - Wikipedia) and psychosis (Psychosis - Wikipedia), and there are many elements of this type on these pages. “Psychosis is an abnormal condition of the mind that results in difficulties determining what is real and what is not real. Symptoms may include delusions and hallucinations. Other symptoms may include incoherent speech and behavior that is inappropriate for the situation. There may also be sleep problems, social withdrawal, lack of motivation, and difficulties carrying out daily activities. Psychosis can have serious outcomes.†(Wikipedia,2021). This describes this type very well: The incoherent speech is actually explained by Jung and the inappropriate behavior either, the social withdrawal that is expected from the introversion.
A delusion is a fixed belief that is not amenable to change in light of conflicting evidence. As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, confabulation, dogma, illusion, or some other misleading effects of perception.†(wikipedia on delusion) - This also hits this type as a pathology, since the dogma is more related to Extraverted Thinking, whereas this case is not related to people being lied to or believing in lies. Ruling these exceptions out, the delusion here is a fixed belief not amenable to change in the light of conflicting evidence because, for the person, the evidence is always replaced with the internal content that does not belong to reality.
“An illusion is a distortion of the senses, which can reveal how the human brain normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. Although illusions distort our perception of reality, they are generally shared by most people.
(...)
Some illusions are based on general assumptions the brain makes during perception. These assumptions are made using organizational principles (e.g., Gestalt theory), an individual's capacity for depth perception and motion perception, and perceptual constancy. Other illusions occur because of biological sensory structures within the human body or conditions outside the body within one's physical environment.
The term illusion refers to a specific form of sensory distortion. Unlike a hallucination, which is a distortion in the absence of a stimulus, an illusion describes a misinterpretation of a true sensation. For example, hearing voices regardless of the environment would be a hallucination, whereas hearing voices in the sound of running water (or another auditory source) would be an illusion.†(Wikipedia on illusion) - Si is about sensory distortion! However, there are two things... The sensory distortion not only can bring illusion but can also bring hallucination, pretty much both:
“A mild form of hallucination is known as a disturbance, and can occur in most of the senses above. These may be things like seeing movement in peripheral vision, or hearing faint noises or voices. Auditory hallucinations are very common in schizophrenia. They may be benevolent (telling the subject good things about themselves) or malicious, cursing the subject, etc. Auditory hallucinations of the malicious type are frequently heard for example people talking about the subject behind their back.†(Wikipedia on hallucination)
Remember this: “Actually he lives in a mythological world, where men, animals, locomotives, houses, rivers, and mountains appear either as benevolent deities or as malevolent demons.â€. Its strikingly similar.
Another interesting thing is to note that all types can use Sensing on an introverted orientation except the Ne-doms in theory. This partially where the human “subjectiveness†applies, and on Jung the only exception is actually Se-dom and Ne-dom (even though I would say that Ne-dom is not that much immune). So, a Si general example is Vierordt's law (Vierordt's law): - Wikipedia “Vierordt's law is "a robust phenomenon in time estimation research that has been observed with different time estimation methods". It states that, retrospectively, "short" intervals of time tend to be overestimated, and "long" intervals of time tend to be underestimated†– this links to this - “The too low is raised a little, the too high is loweredâ€.
There are also other distortions related to this type on other typologies. What I mean is, if we read the hybrid of MBTI and cognitive functions (which is what most people from former data types themselves and still do) and the enneagram connections, we see that, while Ne and Se are mostly accommodated by Type 7, Te mostly accommodated on Type 3 and 8, Fe very accommodated on Type 2, Fi mostly accommodated on Type 4 and a little bit on 9, Ti being quite accommodated on Type 5, Ni is more spread and partially accommodated on Type 4, while Si is accommodated on Type 6 and partially on Type 9 (and there are some traces of Si type on both, even though Type 9 is “very stableâ€), that is basically the most undifferentiated type of all the enneagram types. Also, on MBTI, Si was very changed, and the Si you read out there that is mostly SJ rather than Jung Si, does posses traits from Thinking, specially Extraverted Thinking (relations with rules, procedures, etc...) and also traits from the undifferentiated type (traditional, loyal and quite low creativity – these characteristics are from the undifferentiated type). I think a part of this is because on the data most Si users taken into account were all less differentiated, and that cause the Si type on MBTI to be transformed and to absorb and abduct traits from the undifferentiated type on MBTI – since for MBTI everyone need to have a type – and to take Thinking and Feeling, specially the former, traits, since with less differentiation of the primary the auxiliary function (for a pure Si type or any of the other 7 types the auxiliary and tertiary are undifferentiated, mix, so it is as if there are two auxiliary function with four possible attitudes) plays a significant larger role. I think Te was more captured because of two things: First, because the less differentiation also has to happen on the E/I attitude, so that is why the ‘e’, and second, today’s data say there are more ISTJs than ISFJs world-wide, so probably for the Si type there were more Si-f than Si-t for the sample, which makes a biased towards thinking, thus making the Te type having traits abducted by Si, while there is also the problem that the opposite of the dogmatism of the intellectual formula of the Te type is the “open-mindness†and openness to experience of Ne, which is sort of a Jung flaw. Another aspect is that the MBTI might want to not generate any unhealthy patterns or unhealthy types, so, basically, any combination of Sensing/Sensation with internal and internalization leads to this pattern, which might incentive them to remove the internal vs external orientation or rather restrict it into only people and social related theme (isolated vs social replacement) and this could be a factor that made the MBTI E/I to be very social vs not social oriented while losing other Jung E/I aspects that are not related to socialization.
So, yeah, “my caseâ€, or rather my theory, is quite strong here, this might be the biggest flaw on Jung once you understood it, however, to be honest, it is only a flaw if you are expecting all types to be equally healthy in the first place – if that premise doesn’t exist, then that is not, exactly, a flaw. But, yeah, it is sort of weird having one type as being mostly unhealthy if pronounced. And this whole factor actually interferes into how MBTI was constructed – this creates a hole on the typology, and this hole does have interference with the correlations and statistical construct of the MBTI, since Myers was not expecting one of the types barely existing, and this might had changed the construction of N/S and E/I on MBTI, specially because this was probably the cause of the appearance of the facet ‘tradition’ on Sensing, while Sensation and Sensing as functions got nothing to do with tradition at all. And all of it makes me question if Jung was really “wrong†into assigning empirical and external orientation in general to E/I rather than N/S as well...
