What MBTI type was Carl Jung

[Paladin-X]

The purpose of jargon is to conceal meaning.

That is a possible purpose, but not the purpose and certainly not my intention. I resent the implication.

 

[uumlau]

The purpose of jargon is to conceal meaning.

The purpose of jargon is to convey meaning, providing words for things that did not previously have words. Otherwise, conversations about most technical topics would sound like this:

 

[Mole]

That is a possible purpose, but not the purpose and certainly not my intention. I resent the implication.

Resent away.

I live in a political Capital run by Public Servants. Both the pollies and the Public Servants use jargon to obscure meaning.

Also cults like mbti use jargon to befuddle the minds of the followers so they won't ask too many searching questions.

No, those who want to convey meaning use plain English.

And yes, George Orwell warned us of jargon in 1946 and showed how to use plain English to convey meaning -

Click on George Orwell: Politics and the English Language

 

[Mole]

The purpose of jargon is to convey meaning

I think you mean notation rather than jargon.

For instance, there is mathematical notation, musical notation, dance notation, computer notation, etc.

And the International Journal of Notational Analysis covers a multitude of fields.

And note, there is no International Journal of Jargon Analysis.

 

[Paladin-X]

Resent away.

I live in a political Capital run by Public Servants. Both the pollies and the Public Servants use jargon to obscure meaning.

Also cults like mbti use jargon to befuddle the minds of the followers so they won't ask too many searching questions.

No, those who want to convey meaning use plain English.

And yes, George Orwell warned us of jargon in 1946 and showed how to use plain English to convey meaning -

Click on George Orwell: Politics and the English Language

lol. If you had questions you could always ask. Why are you so cynical?

Public servants in my neighbourhood use jargon to obscure meaning.
Therefore everyone uses jargon to obscure meaning.

That's weird logic.


I was using the same language that Jung used to debate Jungian concepts with [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION]. Why are you picking a fight with me? What did I ever do to you? Where is the love?

 

[yeghor]

I think Jung was an ISTJ. He looks like he had low F in his photos. There's some hidden fierceness in his eyes which may point towards high S function.

I've seen this kind of look before. I think N types have a less stern look so he's not high in N.

 

[Mole]

Where is the love?

You want me to love you?

Yet here I am on the opposite side of the world in another hemisphere, iiving in a different culture, and you want me to love you.

The appropriate people to love you are your parents. If they practised the helping mode of child rearing, they would have met your narcissistic need to be loved unconditionally when you were a baby.

If your parents were unable to love you unconditionally as a baby and meet your narcissitic needs, you may have been left with a narcissistic neurosis, like so many here.

If you do have a narcissistic neurosis, you will not get your needs met on Typology Central, rather you can get your needs met by a professional therapist who will give you unconditional love, interpret your neurosis, and so repair your psychological damage.

And the advantage of having your psychological damage repaired is that you will not go on to damage others.

 

[Paladin-X]

You want me to love you?

Yet here I am on the opposite side of the world in another hemisphere, iiving in a different culture, and you want me to love you.

The appropriate people to love you are your parents. If they practised the helping mode of child rearing, they would have met your narcissistic need to be loved unconditionally when you were a baby.

If your parents were unable to love you unconditionally as a baby and meet your narcissitic needs, you may have been left with a narcissistic neurosis, like so many here.

If you do have a narcissistic neurosis, you will not get your needs met on Typology Central, rather you can get your needs met by a professional therapist who will give you unconditional love, interpret your neurosis, and so repair your psychological damage.

And the advantage of having your psychological damage repaired is that you will not go on to damage others.

LOL! You know what I love about you? Your crazy projections onto me. I can only handle so much crazy and we are derailing the thread. I'm putting a stop to that and setting you to ignore.

Have a nice day regardless!

I think Jung was an ISTJ. He looks like he had low F in his photos. There's some hidden fierceness in his eyes which may point towards high S function.

I've seen this kind of look before. I think N types have a less stern look so he's not high in N.

In a 1925 lecture Jung did say he had a preference for Thinking and Sensing:

As a natural scientist, thinking and sensation were uppermost in me and intuition and feeling were in the unconscious

- Introduction to Jungian Psychology, Notes of the Seminar on Analytical Psychology Given in 1925​

Though he also stated in a 1950s interview that he preferred Thinking and Intuition (already posted by [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION] on the first page).

 

[Mole]

In a 1925 lecture Jung did say he had a preference for Thinking and Sensing:

- Introduction to Jungian Psychology, Notes of the Seminar on Analytical Psychology Given in 1925​

Though he also stated in a 1950s interview that he preferred Thinking and Intuition (already posted by [MENTION=7595]INTP[/MENTION] on the first page).

Carl Gustav Jung wrote that his book Personality Types was based on no empirical evidence.

And empirical evidence is the difference between a guru and a psychologist.

Modern medicine is evidence based medicine, and modern psychology is evidence base psychology.

And gurus want to fool us because we want to fool ourselves.

 

[Flâneuse]

INFJ with heavy Ti is my tentative typing, but I still need to read more about him to form a solid impression of his type.

 

[reckful]

Carl Gustav Jung wrote that his book Personality Types was based on no empirical evidence.

Here's some of what he wrote:

[Psychological Types] is the fruit of nearly twenty years' work in the domain of practical psychology. It grew gradually in my thoughts, taking shape from the countless impressions and experiences of a psychiatrist in the treatment of nervous illnesses, from intercourse with men and women of all social levels, from my personal dealings with friend and foe alike, and, finally, from a critique of my own psychological peculiarity.

To the astonishment of the enlightened [the astrological type theory] remains intact today, and is even enjoying a new vogue. This historical retrospect may serve to assure us that our modern attempts to formulate a theory of types are by no means new and unprecedented, even though our scientific conscience does not permit us to revert to these old, intuitive ways of thinking. We must find our own answer to this problem, an answer which satisfies the need of science.

How much of the actual psychology of man can be experienced and observed as quantitatively measurable facts? Such facts do exist, and I believe I have shown in my [word-]assocation studies that extremely complicated psychological facts are accessible to quantitative measurement. But anyone who has probed more deeply into the nature of psychology, demanding something more of it as a science than that it should confine itself within the narrow limits of the scientific method, will also have realized that an experimental method will never succeed in doing justice to the nature of the human psyche, nor will it ever project anything like a true picture of the more complex psychic phenomena. ...

One has only to take the concept "feeling," for instance, and try to visualize everything this concept comprises, to get some sort of notion of the variability and ambiguity of psychological concepts in general. And yet the concept of feeling does express something characteristic that, though not susceptible of quantitative measurement, nevertheless palpably exists. One simply cannot resign oneself, as Wundt does, ... to a mere denial of such essential and fundamental phenomena, and seek to replace them by elementary facts or to resolve them into such. In this way an essential part of psychology is thrown overboard.

I apologize if Jung's perspective has more nuance than you can handle.

 

[Mole]

Jung the Astrologer

Originally Posted by Jung
To the astonishment of the enlightened [the astrological type theory] remains intact today, and is even enjoying a new vogue.

Carl Gustav Jung was an astrologer. And today no astronomer in the world believes in astrology.

Both astrology and mbti have the same truth value - none.

The only interesting question remains is why do so many believe in astrology and mbti.

Is there a psychological explanation?

We may find out on this psychological site.

 

[reckful]

Carl Gustav Jung was an astrologer. And today no astronomer in the world believes in astrology.

Both astrology and mbti have the same truth value - none.

Newton believed in alchemy, but calculus has held up pretty well.

Jung believed in some flaky stuff — God, for example — but his psychological typology wasn't based on astrology. His insights into hardwired personality differences proved to have enough substance to them that, as adjusted and supplemented by Briggs and Myers, they resulted in a personality instrument that — as McCrae and Costa (the leading Big Five scientists) have acknowledged — was effectively tapping into four of the Big Five dimensions years before there was a Big Five.

Life is complicated.

 

[INTP]

In a 1925 lecture Jung did say he had a preference for Thinking and Sensing:

- Introduction to Jungian Psychology, Notes of the Seminar on Analytical Psychology Given in 1925​

The problem with that quote is that when one does scientific work(especially in the old days before theories were so developed that they could be used instead of relying purely on evidence found in the research itself), he needs to have this scientific attitude, which means to focus on sense perceptions(/concrete reality) and use thinking to convey meaning from it.

Also i dont remember where to look for quote, but jung saw that the two aux functions(he called both 2nd and 3rd aux functions) can switch between 2nd and 3rd position in the MBTI sense of function stacks. So he saw himself as Ti dom, who was intuitive, but at least when doing scientific work, he focused on Se(as he saw an INTP to be TiNeSeFe) over Ne. Because Ne while it can offer great insight of possibilities, scientific method requires focus on facts presented by sensation.

Also i dont agree on his view about INTP being TiNeSeFe, but am in support of the newer models with TiNeSiFe.

This might had jung see himself more of an sensing than thinking, because his introverted functions were T and S. There is a lot of information how people get stuck in their dominant attitude, often referred as dom-tert loop.

The bottom line is that he didnt say that he is thinking sensing type, he just said that the natural scientist side of him was thinking-sensing and during the time of focusing on thinking-sensing, intuition and feeling were more unconscious.

Here you can see Jungs view on the scientific method(jungs quote on the right side of the page), which at least to me explains his sensing attitude towards scientific work:

"If doubt is cast on time, space and causality, nothing is left but our experience as we find it. Experience, and not quantification, logic, or even explanation, is the common denominator of science."

Experiencing something is obviously about perception of something through senses = sensation.

So it seems like Jung saw that using thinking and sensing in scientific work is the way to go and he said that thinking-sensing was strong in him when doing scientific work. Therefore would it be any wonder if jung saw himself as thinking-intuitive type in general(he and his closest associate/world renounced analytical psychologist/close friend said this after all), but took up this dom-tert role when doing scientific work as he saw that its needed and because of taking this role, he saw himself as thinking-sensing WHEN doing scientific work?

 

[Mole]

Newton believed in alchemy, but calculus has held up pretty well.

Jung believed in some flaky stuff — God, for example — but his psychological typology wasn't based on astrology. His insights into hardwired personality differences proved to have enough substance to them that, as adjusted and supplemented by Briggs and Myers, they resulted in a personality instrument that — as McCrae and Costa (the leading Big Five scientists) have acknowledged — was effectively tapping into four of the Big Five dimensions years before there was a Big Five.

Life is complicated.

Life is simple. Alchemy is a superstition replaced by the science of chemistry. Astrology is a superstition replaced by the science of astronomy. And mbti is a superstition replaced by the science of psychometrics.

The New Age thrives on superstition.

 

[INTP]

Carl Gustav Jung was an astrologer. And today no astronomer in the world believes in astrology.

Both astrology and mbti have the same truth value - none.

The only interesting question remains is why do so many believe in astrology and mbti.

Is there a psychological explanation?

We may find out on this psychological site.

Jung was an alchemist and ( @<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/members/18736.html" target="_blank">reckful</a> ) a gnostic, who saw "god", not in the christian sense, but gnosticism as a whole being about the inner experience, hence he said when asked about his belief in god that "I dont have to believe, i know.."). He was not astrologist, even tho some of the disciplines he followed talked about astrology as portraying something of the human mind, but its totally different astrology than what astrology is today(which is what you are aiming at)..

Basically jung saw that religions are talking about what comes through the unconscious, but whether or not that the "voice of god" coming from intuition/dreams was some real god, or just a function of the mind, he didnt seem to have a answer for. But he did acknowledge that different religions speak the truth, just that the truth isnt a literal truth..

Its funny that i have come to similar conclusion before reading jung, and i dont regard myself as a theist..

 

[INTP]

Life is simple. Alchemy is a superstition replaced by the science of chemistry. Astrology is a superstition replaced by the science of astronomy. And mbti is a superstition replaced by the science of psychometrics.

The New Age thrives on superstition.

Alchemy is similar to buddhism in the sense that it aims for human wholeness. And yes, it makes associations between things like mars and archetype of war, which might be a bit far fetched(but funnily if you look at world today and the aim to get some use out of mars, i wouldnt be amazed if the 3rd or 4th worl war was about mars). Alchemy doesent replace science by belief, alchemy forms a belief from science, and ofc makes some assumptions about stuff like metallurgy and psyche that they strive for..

Just so that you know that the philosophers stone that is supposed to turn base metals into gold, is a metaphor(that some took literally) about transformation of the psyche from typical sheep like state to enlightened state, where one is a master of his own psyche..

 

[Mole]

Alchemy is similar to buddhism in the sense that it aims for human wholeness. And yes, it makes associations between things like mars and archetype of war, which might be a bit far fetched(but funnily if you look at world today and the aim to get some use out of mars, i wouldnt be amazed if the 3rd or 4th worl war was about mars). Alchemy doesent replace science by belief, alchemy forms a belief from science, and ofc makes some assumptions about stuff like metallurgy and psyche that they strive for..

Just so that you know that the philosophers stone that is supposed to turn base metals into gold, is a metaphor(that some took literally) about transformation of the psyche from typical sheep like state to enlightened state, where one is a master of his own psyche..

I admire your chutzpah in defending alchemy.

Who would have thought of defending alchemy in a world of the Periodic Table and Chemistry?

It is proof that those under the influence of the New Age and Carl Gustav Jung will believe anything.

And in believing anything, they believe nothing.

 

[Mole]

Jung was an alchemist and ( @<a href="http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/members/18736.html" target="_blank">reckful</a> ) a gnostic, who saw "god", not in the christian sense, but gnosticism as a whole being about the inner experience, hence he said when asked about his belief in god that "I dont have to believe, i know.."). He was not astrologist, even tho some of the disciplines he followed talked about astrology as portraying something of the human mind, but its totally different astrology than what astrology is today(which is what you are aiming at)..

Basically jung saw that religions are talking about what comes through the unconscious, but whether or not that the "voice of god" coming from intuition/dreams was some real god, or just a function of the mind, he didnt seem to have a answer for. But he did acknowledge that different religions speak the truth, just that the truth isnt a literal truth..

Its funny that i have come to similar conclusion before reading jung, and i dont regard myself as a theist..

The Red Book shows that Carl Gustav Jung was psychotic.

And the defining characteristic of the psychotic is that they are out of touch with reality.

Carl Gustav Jung left Sigmund Freud behind, he left reality behind, and worked freely and willingly for the National Socialists in Germany.

How telling that the New Age has adopted him as their guru.

 

[INTP]

I admire your chutzpah in defending alchemy.

Who would have thought of defending alchemy in a world of the Periodic Table and Chemistry?

It is proof that those under the influence of the New Age and Carl Gustav Jung will believe anything.

And in believing anything, they believe nothing.

Well it was the alchemists who laid the foundation to modern chemistry, medicine and even to some major aspects of physics.

Its funny that you say that "under the influence of the New Age and Carl Gustav Jung will believe anything." because the reasons why i see jung, alchemy and some gnostic beliefs as portraying some truth, is that i found those "truths" myself, and only then found other people(like jung) and philosophies like alchemy and gnostic beliefs talking about the same "truth", which i found from studying religions/philosophies from different parts of the world. For example i realized from australian aboriginals, buddhism and native american beliefs that this thing that people call god, is actually just a part of our psyche, which is mostly unconscious and people project onto stories like that of a christians. = it wasnt the new age or jung that caused my beliefs, i figured that on my own and then found this guy who said almost the same things that i had thought.. I also knew that there must be something that is the root of it all(and i dont mean the psyche, which really is the root of it all, but some knowledge of it) and found that knowledge of egypt(=alchemy) fits that quite well, as it laid the foundation to stuff like eastern aclhemy, which was the root of buddhist traditions.

Also "It can be said that each culture, era and individual Alchemy has passed through expresses a different aspect of its teachings and potentiality"

The Red Book shows that Carl Gustav Jung was psychotic.

And the defining characteristic of the psychotic is that they are out of touch with reality.

Carl Gustav Jung left Sigmund Freud behind, he left reality behind, and worked freely and willingly for the National Socialists in Germany.

How telling that the New Age has adopted him as their guru.

Having a psychic breakdown doesent mean that a person is psychotic, it can be neurosis as well. Its quite normal way of the psyche to react on stuff like being raped as a young boy, dealing with real psychotics all the time for years, then dealing with neurotics and trying to figure it all out. But what ever it was that jung experienced, it surely has helped his theories to move forward and even helped todays psychology. You obviously dont seem to know how much influence jung had on modern psychology, and i dont care to explain it all.

Freud was too occupied with his own complexes and ego to be able to form any proper theories of the psyche, even tho he made some contributions to psychology and has created a foundation that has pushed psychotherapy forwards a great deal. Its funny that you always keep saying that jung was a nazi, even tho he had many friends that were jews and didnt view other races as inferior, he even admired the culture of many aboriginals. And yes he worked for nazi germany, because there was a strong possibility of psychology being pushed down completely in germany, he worked to save that, not to help nazis.