What Enneagram Type is Carl Jung?

[INTP]

Then likewise? Why do you assume that I chose to ignore that piece of information. I didn't, I just incorporated into my understanding of things which you disagree with. You believe that his statement in the television interview that can be taken in the literal most basic sense of understanding. I however see things differently.

I'd suggest actually looking into things rather than you know, writing stuff off as stupid. Otherwise you'll just come across as selective with data.

Anyhow, this is originally where I came across this person. Again, it's secondary information but it's claiming what Jung did.


- http://intjforum.com/showthread.php?t=72268


Haha. Yes, whatever you say. Not sure why you seem to be constantly wanting to turn things personal into an argument (even with mal) about who is wrong or right. I'm just presenting data and my own opinion, I already said a long time ago we'll just have to disagree with each other's interpretation.

Looking into what things? I have been looking up to analytical psychology for few years and into MBTI. Nothing i have encountered even remotely suggests to what you said. Its just something you read on some forum written by some random guy not understanding how things work. What jung thought about typology before he wrote the 'psychological types' is irrelevant, its not something that got into the system of his typology. You seriously cant see the logic fail in that? . That post you quoted from INTJ forum is just some random guy making some illogical assumptions.

Reply to this post with proper reasoning and we can continue:

First of all the two personalities wasnt a split personality. Personality no.1 was about ego and persona, conscious attitude and how one presents self to the world, personality no.2 was about the unconscious aspects of self, personal and collective.
People often see tert/inferior to be the unconscious aspects of self, but in jungian model, tert and inferior are also(and more importantly) the gateways for unconscious(personal and collective) material.
Jung viewed science as more congurent to his no.1 personality and humanities as more in line with his personality no.2.

"It was only natural that jung would initially distrust the eros(feeling) component of his fantacy because emotion made his no.1 personality uncomfortable." ( http://ebookbrowse.com/personality-in-context-walters-jung-pdf-d22221746 )

Jung also had an habit of rationalizing some of his bit unethical behavior. Like his relationship with sabina spielberg(former patient of his who jung stopped charging and started fucking).

Add the fact that he mentioned that he was always characterized by thinking. And remember that dom function developes first, this fact and the things mentioned above its clear that he was a thinker. He said that he wasnt particularily good with the reality = N. Had a definite problems with feeling = T. He had told it multiple times that he was an introvert. This would leave room for INTP and INTJ types, but he looked for patterns in the external world(religions(including buddhism and alchemy), cultures, myths, history, schizophrenics, neurotics, people with everyday problems, philosophers etc) to come up with theories, which he refined internally = INTP.

 

[INTP]

I wonder.



What do you think is the integration side of type 5?

8. What do you think is the integration side of 8?

What MBTI type do you think freud was and how well do you think that type fitting to enneagram 5, how about to 8 or 3?

 

[Mal12345]

Only cry cuz cant argue against and ego cant accept failure

I have already defeated your ad hom assertion that the MBTI stereotypes.

But if you want to make this about "the other," which is just your Fe Inferior projecting its traits on me, I can assure you that at one time I saw Jung as an INTJ but my "ego" released its hold on that idea although I don't want to see Jung as either Fe or Fi auxilliary. But this required a lot of evidence from Jung's life.

Now, why doesn't your ego consider all the evidence, not just the parts that it likes, and let go of this silly notion that Jung was an INTP?

 

[Snow Turtle]

Looking into what things? I have been looking up to analytical psychology for few years and into MBTI. Nothing i have encountered even remotely suggests to what you said. Its just something you read on some forum written by some random guy not understanding how things work. What jung thought about typology before he wrote the 'psychological types' is irrelevant, its not something that got into the system of his typology. You seriously cant see the logic fail in that? . That post you quoted from INTJ forum is just some random guy making some illogical assumptions.

Reply to this post with proper reasoning and we can continue:

Yes, because everyone else who disagrees with you evidently doesn't understand how things work. They can't have studied Jung in equal amount of depth and come to a different conclusion. Honestly, I'm done with this: I don't think you even realize how you are coming across with your opinions.

You can conclude my post that it's illogical and irrelevant. I don't mind. This will be my last post on this argument.

I already addressed the stuff in the post below. I came to a different interpretation. That's the end of the story. I did however find the post about the personality one being aligned with science, while two with humanities interesting, but none of this discredits the idea that he could have been a dysfunctional INFJ (given his childhood). Regarding the whole "Capitalized by thinking" - I've already given my explanations for why an dysfunctional INFJs who is primarily focused on Ni-Ti could say that most of their life has been characterised by thinking (especially for male INFJs) and struggle with his feelings, which may be a more accurate representation of the individual than his surface behaviour. Of course, this doesn't agree with Jung's idea that the psyche is a combination of both but more along frued's idea that the unconscious is more of the true self.

While the theory of active imagination does sound like it'd be Ne based. Stuff like Synchronicity in drawing meaningful conclusions from seemingly independent events is one of the standard stereotypes behind what Ni is. It's also the reason that INFJ individuals are sometimes dubbed as conspiracy theorists when unhealthy - The whole drawing meaningful interpretations from unrelated events. Meh.

 

[Ethanescence]

That doesn't indicate either Te or Ti. But he was very psychic and dreamed about his death months before it happened. He also dreamed about WWI months before it happened. These instances along with many others tell me that he was not an INTP. As psychically-inclined, that makes him an INFJ. And as with many INFJs he had the ability to draw on Ti, the logical systems-builder.

Yeah, I don't think Myers ever did a statistical analysis of the MBTI of fortune tellers, to be honest. All INFJs are psychics? Jung was psychic? I really have no words.

And both INTP and INFJ use Ti.

 

[INTP]

I have already defeated your ad hom assertion that the MBTI stereotypes.

But if you want to make this about "the other," which is just your Fe Inferior projecting its traits on me, I can assure you that at one time I saw Jung as an INTJ but my "ego" released its hold on that idea although I don't want to see Jung as either Fe or Fi auxilliary. But this required a lot of evidence from Jung's life.

Now, why doesn't your ego consider all the evidence, not just the parts that it likes, and let go of this silly notion that Jung was an INTP?

You know whats funny. I write alot of arguments against what you say, and you just pick one thing to reply to. For example this post

You should stop reading some stereotypical MBTI descriptions. I have developed an uncanny insight to people after learning about psychology. Types with Ti/Fe feel(as in using feeling function) what other think, while Te/Fi think what others feel. So this stupid stereotype of INFJ doesent tell you anything real.

This jung intuitively understanding people doesent seem to fit, he analyzed them throughout or used past experiences to dwell deeper into the other persons psyche.

How do you explain jung that at one point of life had an stage where he stopping listening to what his patients were telling him to a large degree and used earlier experiences to gain an insight on them. Sounds much like being heavily under the influence of Si, doesent it?

What makes you think that jung was so "psychic" in his nature?




I have also looked into mystical experiences to understand the world before i got into psychology. For example the dream world of australian aboriginals, native american beliefs, buddhism, egyptians etc.

This isnt something that INFJs do only. You using an argument "INFJ is like this and that" is highly flawed, because those things fit to other types aswell, especially to INTPs. For example this theory of mind thing is far more likely to be done by an INTP than INFJ, but naturally INFJs might do that also.

About this INFJs being gentle and avoid hurting them thing, this is quite different from jung. He was not concerned about peoples feeling in general and was quite rude at times, naturally this wasnt the case with his patients, since he(like most sane people) see the vurnebility of people who have some issues with their minds.

This INFJs showing up in areas where they can be creative and somewhat independant. This is also very true with INTP and i would say it to be true more often in INTPs than INFJs, also applies often to ENTPs and other types aswell.

You just picked up me saying MBTI descriptions being stereotypes and ignored the rest. Jungs typology is about psychological functions, it examines the common factors in peoples cognition, this isnt stereotyping. MBTI descriptions on the other hand looks for traits are typical within the type, this is stereotyping, these common traits with the type that MBTI lists are evident in other types also.

This sort of arguing from your side doesent lead anywhere.

Also what do you think this harmony seeking pleasant to all INFJ would be saying things like this?
" To say Jung panned the exhibit would be an understatement. His article assumed a harsh, dismissive, and abusive tone. It's grim conclusion was that Picasso's art amounted to nothing more than a manifestation of mental illness."

Why do you think that i dont have much knowledge about jung and are making this assumption about his type based on too little information? You are the one being like "jung was all nice harmony seeking INFJ, because of (no reason given)", when in reality he was more like typical INTP giving harsh critique to people, like this picasso thing. Naturally he also had Fe, Ti clearly Ti was more differentiated, but thats no wonder, he said it himself that he was always characterized by thinking, even as a child, F types are not like this.

 

[Ethanescence]

INFJ Ni-Fe-Ti-Se
INTP Ti-Ne-Si-Fe
INTJ Ni-Te-Fi-Se

1. Jung built his own complex internal system of thought and theory. This is clearly Ti. This rules out the Te of INTJ. That means he's either INTP or INFJ.

2. INFJ and INTP share Ti and Fe.

3. INFJ and INTP are different through Ni (INFJ)/Ne (INTP) and Si (INTP)/Se (INFJ).

4. The Ni/Ne question is easily confused. Jung was clearly N, but I don't think we can rule out Ni or Ne without intense and lengthy discussion. It would be better to focus on the Se/Si distinction.

5. Was Jung Se or Si?

Si collects data in the present moment and compares it with past experiences. This process sometimes evokes the feelings associated with memory as if the subject were reliving it. Seeking to protect what is familiar, Si draws upon history to form goals and expectations about what will happen in the future.

Se focuses on the experiences and sensations of the immediate, physical world. With an acute awareness of the present surroundings, it brings relevant facts and details to the forefront and may lead to spontaneous action.

In Jung's writings, I don't think there's any support whatsoever for Se over Si. Even when there's a scarab beetle knocking against his office window (his patient just recounted a dream about a scarab bettle) he describes it as novel experience -- an example of synchronicity theory. That's not acute awareness of present surroundings, that's collecting data from the present moment and comparing it with past experiences.

Aspects such as active imagination (engaging with the psyche and memories in an active manner) and his work with patients (he frequently backtracks to his childhood memories in order to make a point about the present situation) demonstrates a preference for Si.

Si is clear in the extract below. Jung relies on it in order to solve his mental disturbances. I have bolded the clearly Si statements.

Jung in Confrontations with the unconscious

I lived as if under constant pressure. At times this became so strong that I suspected there was some psychic disturbance in myself. Therefore, I twice went over all the details of my entire life, with particular attention to childhood memories; for I thought there might be something in my past which I could not see and which might possibly be a cause for this disturbance. But this retrospection led to nothing but a fresh acknowledgment of my ignorance. Thereupon I said to myself, "Since I know nothing at all, I shall simply do whatever occurs to me." [Although this is a Se approach, the result is clearly Si] Thus I consciously submitted to the impulses of the unconscious.

The first thing that came to the surface was a childhood memory from perhaps my tenth or eleventh year. At that time I had a spell of playing passionately with building blocks. [...]

Additionally...

If we also look at the dominance of the functions, Jung was primarily a thinker and system builder. In INTP Ti is dominant, while in INFJ Ti is tertiary. As Jung says that he struggles with his feelings, it makes sense his Fe would be inferior like an INTP, and not auxiliary like an INFJ. And although Jung's Si is not perfect (see extract above), he clearly uses his Sensing function more than his Feeling function.

When Jung is confused as a Feeling type (INFJ), I put it down to a highly developed Fe inferior function (INTP). Which would make sense in someone so highly attuned to introspection and individuation. However, anyone who says Jung's Thinking, iNtuition or Sensing is less developed than his Feeling function has something amiss with their perspective.

 

[INTP]

Yes, because everyone else who disagrees with you evidently doesn't understand how things work. They can't have studied Jung in equal amount of depth and come to a different conclusion. Honestly, I'm done with this: I don't think you even realize how you are coming across with your opinions.

You can conclude my post that it's illogical and irrelevant. I don't mind. This will be my last post on this argument.

I already addressed the stuff in the post below. I came to a different interpretation. That's the end of the story. I did however find the post about the personality one being aligned with science, while two with humanities interesting, but none of this discredits the idea that he could have been a dysfunctional INFJ (given his childhood). Regarding the whole "Capitalized by thinking" - I've already given my explanations for why an dysfunctional INFJs who is primarily focused on Ni-Ti could say that most of their life has been characterised by thinking (especially for male INFJs) and struggle with his feelings, which may be a more accurate representation of the individual than his surface behaviour. Of course, this doesn't agree with Jung's idea that the psyche is a combination of both but more along frued's idea that the unconscious is more of the true self.

While the theory of active imagination does sound like it'd be Ne based. Stuff like Synchronicity in drawing meaningful conclusions from seemingly independent events is one of the standard stereotypes behind what Ni is. It's also the reason that INFJ individuals are sometimes dubbed as conspiracy theorists when unhealthy - The whole drawing meaningful interpretations from unrelated events. Meh.

But you see, if i notice that someones opinion is based on things that are clearly caused by lack of knowledge and false information, its natural for me to think that their opinion is wrong if it differs from mine. For example mal saying that jung was Ni type because of prophetic dreams, i knew that these things were not due to Ni, but is a general aspect of dreams. Him talking about jung fitting on the INFJ stereotype by giving all these quotes about INFJs being harmony seeking polite etc people and saw jung like that. Jung wasnt like that, he was rather rude in many situations, like this comment on picasso that i mentioned in last post. Jung when having a rough day and his friends wanting to talk to him, he was like grrr go away. But naturally apologized later, but that apologizing thing isnt an INFJ trait alone either, i personally do that too.

What comes to Ni and conspiracy theories, its not just Ni types that are like that, INTPs are like that also. http://www.intpforum.com/showthread.php?t=10182

If jung was an INFJ, meaning that he had a tert Ti. It doesent really fit with 'the reconciling third' and 'transcendent function', he said that he had been always characterized by thinking, but saw tert as being a product of clash of dom and inferior, thought that this would happen later in life, thought that dominant function developed first etc etc. There is a logical mistake in this tert Ti thing, it simply wont fit to the ideas that jung had about his typology and development of type. Not to mention that he saw the personality no.1 as being ego + persona and saw his personality no.1 as thinking. Now you could argue that thinking was part of his persona from early on, but then there is another mistake in logic, jung saw persona oriented extraverted, which would make him NiTe, again conflicting with the INFJ theory. Also he saw personality no.2 being the typological shadow side(tert/inferior) and saw his personality no.2 being a feeler, which intimidated his personality no.1..

There is just too much logical conflicts in peoples argument that i cant take them seriously and its clear that these logical conflicts arise from lack of knowledge in many cases or aee based on misconceptions.

 

[INTP]

...

And in addition to this resolving the conflict with Si, just saw tert as being the function that resolves conflict between dom and inferior. And he saw this as being part of self regulation of psyche.

About the quote, i went through similar going through all the details of the past when i had a little comfortation with my shadow. Except that i aknowledged where the situation originated and concentrated on the things related to it. It also led me to nothing but fresh aknowledgment of my ignorance about the thing..

 

[Mal12345]

You know whats funny. I write alot of arguments against what you say, and you just pick one thing to reply to. For example this post.

And I'm sure your hand-waving my INFJ description was equally as unwelcome. You can't just wave away something that I wrote and then expect me to pay attention to your stuff.

 

[Mal12345]

Yeah, I don't think Myers ever did a statistical analysis of the MBTI of fortune tellers, to be honest. All INFJs are psychics? Jung was psychic? I really have no words.

And both INTP and INFJ use Ti.

That's because you haven't done your homework on this. Jung was, as I put it above, "psychically-inclined."
http://www.nndb.com/people/910/000031817/
I suggest that you read this entire page about Jung before continuing in the same vein. But here is the relevant part, and it is just one experience of many in Jung's lifetime:

'However, in the fall of 1913, not long after his break with Freud, Jung became plagued with peculiar and deeply disturbing dreams. First came a dream of a "monstrous flood" that spread across Europe, all the way to the Swiss Alps. He saw thousands of people drowning and civilization itself falling into ruin. Then the flood changed from a deluge of water to one of blood. Subsequent dreams featured images of eternal winter and rivers of blood. Jung, who had recorded and studied his own dreams since childhood, was at a loss to relate the bizarre nightmares to anything within his own personal life. He eventually began to fear that he was lapsing into psychosis.

'Several months later, the nationalism and extremism spreading across Germany escalated into terrible violence and repression (and much later, Nazism and international war). The dreams suddenly made a kind of sense, like symbolic premonitions of what was to come. But how could one account for such things? What mechanisms of the mind would allow him to envision such things, even at unconscious levels, before even the earliest stages of the events occurred?'

And the INFJ page does NOT say that all INFJs are psychics, you are misquoting. It says "some INFJs report experiences of a psychic nature."

And both INTP and INFJ use Ti.

You can't affirm that INFJ in general uses Ti without - what did you call it above - OH YES, you called it "statistical analysis." (This rule apparently applies to other claims but never to your own claims.) Therefore you're only subjectively assuming. But if that INFJ had a neurotic condition, as with Jung, I would definitely assume it as part and parcel with tertiary theory.

 

[Mal12345]

Jung's E-type and instinctual are 4w5 So/Sp

http://ocean-moonshine.net/e1428573...er_op=view_page&PAGE_id=26&MMN_position=84:80
Social/Self-pres

'This subtype can mimic type One when it comes to social values. They can be harsh critics of the current mores. They have romantic ideals of what the world should be like; reality always falls short. Ironically, this type can be the most withdrawn of the Fours. Social anxiety combines with the Four's shame issues to make this type feel that the pressure associated with "fitting in" is just not worth it. They are also the most likely of the Fours to intellectualize their emotions and in this way resemble type Five.

The social instinct tends to give the personality a focus on being included, fitting in, or finding a way to make a valued contribution. This agenda conflicts with the Four's sense of being "different from" or "other than." The Four's need to establish a separate identity conflicts with the social instinct's drive towards inclusion. The social Four often deals with this dilemma by defining themselves as being outside the social system. By defining themselves always in terms of the system, even if it is to establish distance, this Four stays essentially tied to it. Fours with the social/self-pres stacking tend to acutely feel a sense of social shame at not quite belonging.

When this subtype is reasonably healthy, they are often gifted critics of the prevailing culture. They develop true insight into social dynamics and have an eye for the nuances and subtleties of social interactions. Many Four writers are soc/self.'

 

[Snow Turtle]

INFJ Ni-Fe-Ti-Se
INTP Ti-Ne-Si-Fe
INTJ Ni-Te-Fi-Se

1. Jung built his own complex internal system of thought and theory. This is clearly Ti. This rules out the Te of INTJ. That means he's either INTP or INFJ.

2. INFJ and INTP share Ti and Fe.

3. INFJ and INTP are different through Ni (INFJ)/Ne (INTP) and Si (INTP)/Se (INFJ).

4. The Ni/Ne question is easily confused. Jung was clearly N, but I don't think we can rule out Ni or Ne without intense and lengthy discussion. It would be better to focus on the Se/Si distinction.

5. Was Jung Se or Si?


In Jung's writings, I don't think there's any support whatsoever for Se over Si. Even when there's a scarab beetle knocking against his office window (his patient just recounted a dream about a scarab bettle) he describes it as novel experience -- an example of synchronicity theory. That's not acute awareness of present surroundings, that's collecting data from the present moment and comparing it with past experiences.

Aspects such as active imagination (engaging with the psyche and memories in an active manner) and his work with patients (he frequently backtracks to his childhood memories in order to make a point about the present situation) demonstrates a preference for Si.

Si is clear in the extract below. Jung relies on it in order to solve his mental disturbances. I have bolded the clearly Si statements.



Additionally...

If we also look at the dominance of the functions, Jung was primarily a thinker and system builder. In INTP Ti is dominant, while in INFJ Ti is tertiary. As Jung says that he struggles with his feelings, it makes sense his Fe would be inferior like an INTP, and not auxiliary like an INFJ. And although Jung's Si is not perfect (see extract above), he clearly uses his Sensing function more than his Feeling function.

When Jung is confused as a Feeling type (INFJ), I put it down to a highly developed Fe inferior function (INTP). Which would make sense in someone so highly attuned to introspection and individuation. However, anyone who says Jung's Thinking, iNtuition or Sensing is less developed than his Feeling function has something amiss with their perspective.

I'm pretty much out of this now but I thought I'd throw these ideas into the pot for contemplation.

Regarding point number 5. If we're utilising under theorists (Not just Jung) then we'd effectively be comparing Si tertiary (INTP) with Se inferior (INFJ) which is hardly a fair comparison when stating that Jung will have a preference for Si. I personally don't think it's a useful technique given that I could easily argue that Jung's statement "Out of touch with reality" isn't just necessarily him saying that he's intuitive but that one of his weakest function is a lack of Se. Then again, I suppose INTPs and INFPs could easily argue the same thing. The question then becomes, which person is more likely to be out of touch with reality? The inferior Si or Se individual?

On one hand I'm inclined to say that it does seem like INXPs are more likely to be out of touch. At the same time, it might just be a result that most INJs have auxillary functions that are focused on the decision making involving the external world (Fe, Te) than say for example (Ne). Given that we're arguing that Carl Jung may have been an neurotic individual who seems to have essentially repressed Fe in favour of Ti. The natural situation of INJs being more in touch with reality than INPs doesn't hold much more weight anymore.

If we're looking into inferior ideas. Maybe we could examine what Jung was like if he ever wrote down what he was like during crisis. There's already a wide source of material regarding that.

http://personalitycafe.com/infj-art...ress-brings-out-infjs-hidden-personality.html

In the grip of inferior Extraverted Sensing, INFJs obsess about details in the outside world, overindulge in sensual pleasures, and externalize blame to outside objects. Their auxiliary Feeling can be the vehicle through which they regain equilibrium. INFJs examine the important meanings and feeling connections involved and are therefore able to regain their normal wide-ranging perspective.

Because of important inferior function experiences, INFJs may become better able to adapt to changing surroundings, incorporate sensual experience into their lives in a satisfying way, and moderate a perhaps overly ambitious, visionary stance into one that is more realistic and possible.

http://personalitycafe.com/intp-articles/76783-recognizing-inferior-function-intp.html

In the grip of inferior Extraverted Feeling, Introverted Thinking types have difficulty functioning at their typical level of cognitive acuity, are hypersensitive to relationship issues, and can be touchy and emotional. Equilibrium is often reestablished via their auxiliary Sensing or Intuition. ISTPs acknowledge one or more important realities bearing on their situation; INTPs find a new idea or perspective that interrupts and modifies their exaggerated sensitivity or emotionalism.

As a result of important inferior function experiences, Introverted Thinking types can acknowledge the importance of the “illogical and unexplainable” and accept their vulnerability to their own and others’ emotional states.They may then have access to and be able to express the depth of their feelings for others.

Question is which one reflected his lifestyle more?
I suppose one could argue that when Jung broke his relationship off with Frued, the response generated is from 'hypersensitivity to relationships', yet at the same time another could argue that breaking of friendships would naturally have a profound impact on FJ individuals. The whole affairs scenario could be a result of underdeveloped Fe (Or Fi), at the same time, it could be argued to be a matter of overindulgence in sensual pleasure. It's too easy to fit data to a theory.

Lastly, I do have one question regarding the whole idea of personality 1 and personality 2. There was a website that suggested that Freud viewed the unconscious as the iceberg, while Jung viewed the unconscious more as an ocean (while considering the consciousness a cork floating) that people needed to confront in order to be a complete individual. Freud would argue that the unconscious is the true self, what would Jung say? Is it that the consciousness-persona-ego is the main personality behind an individual? Edit: I now see that neither believed this, it appears to be my own beliefs formed from a variety of stuff outside psycho-dynamics as well. So let me get this straight then, we're arguing here that personality 2 - the shadows (humanistic side) are just stuff that he learnt to do from society and his parents then? But in some ways, how can you tell whether it's from the superego component, as opposed to the id component of the "shadow"? It appears that I already disagree with Jung's idea. *shrugs*

One could easily claim that Jung himself was just engaging in repression of his true self, over-emphasising thinking which could account for his fear of feeling. Then again, that's like saying most INTPs are like him if they dislike feeling.

Edit 2: Related to the above about the shadows. (Like true Si - collection fashion )
http://www.thesap.org.uk/analytical-psychology

The self
Jung also thought that the way that we see ourselves (our ego) is limited and that 'modern man' has become cut off from his true, instinctual nature. He thought that we need to listen to ourselves and to come to discover who we really are and what we really feel. He came to believe that we need to be guided by what he called the self, which is an unconscious sense of the personality as a whole, an archetypal image of the individual's full potential.

Individuation
He thought that the self acts as a guiding principle within the personality and that following its lead brings about a development of the personality. He described this natural process of development as individuation. This process involves moving toward the manifestation of all the natural elements of the personality. As Jung put it: "Only what is really oneself has the power to heal" [CW 7, para. 258]. This process is never complete as the individual is always reacting to the new, changing situation and must accommodate new parts and configurations of themselves in order to do so.

The shadow
Those elements of the self which have not been integrated into the conscious personality Jung called the shadow. These elements are sometimes in the shadow because the qualities and functions are denied or disowned because the person feels they are unacceptable. These might typically be 'negative', apparently destructive parts of the personality, like aggression or envy (although Jung would say that all aspects of the personality - light and dark - are necessary for the personality if it is to become whole and well-grounded). For other people it might be the vulnerable, sensitive or loving qualities that are denied - a person's particular family or culture will have a strong influence on this.

Which links back to the idea of repression of feelings within Jung. Again links to the idea of feeling (Fe? Fi?). Inferior or Auxillary?

 

[OrangeAppled]

Ultimately there appears to be two pieces of evidence - one which is more vague, the other is more specific but instead a memory recollection of what had been said.

I suppose it'd be wrong to assume that mysticism is aligned with Ni. But in the same regard, I don't think it's fair to automatically assume that troubles with feelings automatically assume T. When in reality, there are plenty of feelers who would define themselves as having troubles with feeling. It honestly is a vague statement. What exactly does trouble with feelings mean? Expression? Conflict?

In the context of the interview, he is answering a specific question about his type. Feeling in this context means the feeling function, then.
This is not what assumes T....what implies T is the statement about being capitalized by thinking. I'll venture to say that the fact that he answers first with Thinking is probably significant, especially as his answer was formed to be "clues", or all the info you need to figure out his type.

A lot of what people attribute to Ni in Jung is stuff I relate to as a Ne-aux, and I see why so many Ne-aux have no trouble seeing this as iNtuition in general & not Ni...

Someone characterised by thinking honestly doesn't mean much if he's not referring to functions but instead his general personality (and it does appear to be general personality rather than IENSFT) especially when he saw himself as a man of science.

The functions ARE the general personality....the dom function + its attitude is the ego that is the visible personality.

Here is the interview...skip to 8:40.

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD-W-1z_qco&feature=player_embedded"]Face to Face with Carl Jung[/YOUTUBE]

I believe that van Der Hoop, a close associate of Jung's, implied Jung was Ti-dom in his book Conscious Orientation also. I think he implied he was a sensing type too, but I think his argument was not so good for that part. Sorry, I don't have a copy on-hand to quote.

-------

I'm actually more interested in the case for him being e9 or e5. I can see arguments for both.
He was described as being very reserved & quiet as a child, but then became loud & boisterous & mischievous in University, and this strikes me as more of a 5 integrating to 8 than a 9 integrating to 3.

 

[Mal12345]

I'm actually more interested in the case for him being e9 or e5. I can see arguments for both.
He was described as being very reserved & quiet as a child, but then became loud & boisterous & mischievous in University, and this strikes me as more of a 5 integrating to 8 than a 9 integrating to 3.

We all see what we want to see. It's not like he couldn't be a loud & boisterous & mischievous 4.

 

[OrangeAppled]

We all see what we want to see. It's not like he couldn't be a loud & boisterous & mischievous 4.

Well, I'm talking about direct descriptions in biographies which use such terms... I have not personally witnessed Jung, so that's a silly thing to say.

 

[Mal12345]

Well, I'm talking about direct descriptions in biographies which use such terms... I have not personally witnessed Jung, so that's a silly thing to say.

No.

 

[Snow Turtle]

In the context of the interview, he is answering a specific question about his type. Feeling in this context means the feeling function, then.
This is not what assumes T....what implies T is the statement about being capitalized by thinking. I'll venture to say that the fact that he answers first with Thinking is probably significant, especially as his answer was formed to be "clues", or all the info you need to figure out his type.

Here is the interview...skip to 8:40.

[YOUTUBE="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD-W-1z_qco&feature=player_embedded"]Face to Face with Carl Jung[/YOUTUBE]

Yes. I understand the reasoning behind taking capitalized by thinking as suggesting T. My main argument that it was possible for a F to make this statement, especially if one struggles with their feelings. I noticed in some of Jung's writing that he wrote the order of functions would be S, T, F, N but that people would develop things differently. It seems to suggest that S-T would be more specific in nature, while F-N appear to be more holistic in nature, and from my perspective, appears to reflect the whole conscious-unconscious difference. (Ti vs Fi, Te vs Fe, Se vs Ne, Si vs Ni) - As an ISFJ I've written many times that it's really obvious to see how I approached each step with my Si, but that does not seem to hold true for INFJ users as much. It's the reason in the past, many have described that they know... but they don't seem to have the exact specific steps all down. Now you could argue this is just a normal difference between S-N.

I think if we're going to be taking him saying T as the first clue, there should be no reason to place priority over the fact that he also mentioned S to be the last clue. For this reason, I don't think we should place emphasis on the order of how he talked about his personality unless you want to resolve this difference. It's interesting since prior to the video, I was under the strong impression that he had said T, N, S, F.

But overall thanks for the video.
I've no problem accepting that Jung himself felt that he was categorized by Ti, my question has always been whether that it's the Ti of an INTP or an INFJ. He's definitely a strange guy.

At that time, psychiatry was not highly respected, so Carl Jung had little interest in it. But when he opened his psychiatric textbook, Krafft-Ebing’s "Lehrbuch der Psychiatrie", 4th edn. ( 1890 ), and read that psychoses are "diseases of the personality" his heart suddenly began to pound. His excitement was intense and it became very clear to him that psychiatry was going to be the goal of his life. He finally found a field to study, that included both spiritual and biological facts.

Kind of crazy to think that he had discovered his life purpose at the age of 15... I guess that's what makes geniuses.

 

[Mal12345]

Kind of crazy to think that he had discovered his life purpose at the age of 15... I guess that's what makes geniuses.

Yes, very strange. Try reading "The Red Book" by Carl Jung. You will find in this book much more of a personal, poetic nature, and less of that intended for intellectual consumption.

Strange that he would say in an interview that he had the most problem with feelings, when we find him writing this in the Red Book:

"Heal the wounds that doubt inflicts on me, my soul. That too is to be overcome, so that I can recognize your supreme meaning. How far away everything is, and how I have turned back! My spirit is a spirit of torment, it tears asunder my contemplation, it would dismantle everything and rip it apart. I am still a victim of my thinking. When can I order my thinking to be quiet, so that my thoughts, those unruly hounds, will crawl to my feet? How can I ever hope to hear your voice louder, to see your face clearer, when all my thoughts howl?"

This was a man in search of his soul.

I myself was an INFJ child, then an INFP teen, and now INTP. I've given up those childhood personality traits but Jung did not. A biography describes him as developing his intellectual side in college. He was more complex than I am in terms of the personas he could draw on.

 

[Snow Turtle]

I thought these were interesting accounts of Jung and Frued's relationship. Naturally I'd say that some of these examples might reflect choosing social harmony over truth. Then again, since I'm biased. I'll just post it here, given that these sort of behaviours could be found within all types of individuals.

In his interview with Billinsky (1969, p. 42), Jung recalls, "Freud had some dreams that bothered him very much. The dreams were about the triangle--Freud, his wife and his wife's younger sister. Freud had no idea I knew about the triangle and his intimate relationship with his sister-in-law. And so, when Freud told me about the dream...I asked (him) to tell me some of his personal associations...He looked at me with bitterness and said, 'I could tell you more but I cannot risk my authority!'" Jung comments in his MEMOIRS (1963, p.158), "At that moment he lost it altogether. That sentence burned itself in my memory; and in it the end of our relationship was already foreshadowed."

Jung for his part was also deceptive in revealing his dreams to Freud. Jung shared a dream with Freud in which he explores a house, descends to the cellar and, then beneath the cellar, finds an ancient vault containing two human skulls. Freud, probing for Jung's secret death wish toward himself, pressed Jung for his associations. Jung, sensing his dream reflected his emerging ideas of the collective unconscious and fearful of Freud's resistance, lied and said the skulls represented those of his wife, Emma and her sister (Jung, 1963, p.159).

In addition to an attempt to mollify Freud, I believe Jung's deception was a subtle attempt on his part to establish more honesty in communication by indirectly revealing his knowledge of Freud's intimate with his sister-in-law, Minna Bernays. Freud, apparently unaware of Jung's knowledge and intent was, according to Jung, "greatly relieved" by Jung's deceptive interpretation of the skulls.

In fact the whole thing is pretty interesting... claims of people feeling hurt because of the lack of acknowledgement about homoerotic crushes and so fourth.
http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/freud.htm

According to Jung (1963/1989), in the summer of 1898, he was studying in his room, with the door half open to the dining room, where his mother was knitting by the window. A very loud crack, like a pistol, surprised them and the circular walnut, solid wood table beside her had split, from the rim to beyond the center. (pp. 104-105)
About 2 weeks later, Jung (1963/1989) says he returned home in the afternoon and found his mother, his fourteen-year-old sister, and the maid very upset. About an hour earlier they had heard another deafening crack. This time it had come from the direction of the sideboard, a heavy piece of furniture dating from the early nineteenth century. They had already examined it and could not find anything strange. Jung immediately began examining the sideboard and the entire surrounding area. In the interior of the sideboard, in the cupboard containing the bread basket he found a bread knife, with its steel blade broken to pieces. Its handle in one corner of the basket, pieces of the blade in all other corners of the basket. Carl Jung kept the fragments of that knife, until his death. (pp. 105-106)
Little did he realize at the time that in the future he would study these phenomena as a part of mind’s functioning.

According to Jung (1963/1989), the first real crisis in their friendship came in spring 1909, from the following incident. Jung visited Freud in Vienna and asked his opinion on precognition and parapsychology. But Freud was too materialistic and rejected these matters in a way that upset Jung. A strange thing happened then. As Freud was leaving, Jung felt his diaphragm burning and a very loud crack came from the bookcase next to them. When Jung told Freud that this is a perfect example of paranormal phenomenon, he still denied it. Then Jung predicted that in a moment there would be another loud noise. And he was right; a second loud crack came from the bookcase. Freud remained puzzled and this incident raised his mistrust towards Jung. (pp. 155-156)

That above is just plain strange.