Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: About jungs 8 types

  1. #1
    Creepy-

    Default About jungs 8 types

    A thing I've thought about, is that the 16 types systems take a lot of things for granted.

    Maybe these subtypes does not exist, in the way the system makes it.

    The thing I'm thinking about, is that some functions go more together than others.

    When someone say intuitive thinker to me, I mostly think of someone + , I dont see as a very creative thinking process, and neigher do I see as very perceptive about people and situation. When I think of someone bright, quick and perceptive, I mostly think of the two functions of and , someone who have dominating , tend to be far more subjetive than someone with a dominating , those with dominant + tend to be the best observers, or that's how I see it. And talk about a creative thinker, and I've give you someone who is .

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    And I'm thinking Guest is going on his egotistic rant again, and that this thread really had nothing to do with Jung's 8 types, and that it should be irradicated.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  3. #3
    mimisor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    821
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Let's discuss this, Jung's types. Anybody?

    If anyone can provide a link, I'm interested in what Jung called
    Primary, Secondary, Tertiary and Inferior functions

  4. #4
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gugu_ baba
    Let's discuss this, Jung's types. Anybody?

    If anyone can provide a link, I'm interested in what Jung called
    Primary, Secondary, Tertiary and Inferior functions
    As far as I'm concerned he did not, it's on the web somewhere, I recall I printed out his book, I'm sure you find it, by using google. I liked it, jung did not made it out to be something it's not.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    6,074
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Jung/types.htm

    Jung talked about dominant and secondary funcitons. He also briefly mentioned repressed (3 & 5) functions.
    MAYBE I'LL BREAK DOWN!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by vague
    Rocky's posts are as enjoyable as having wisdom teeth removed.

  6. #6
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: About jungs 8 types

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    A thing I've thought about, is that the 16 types systems take a lot of things for granted.

    Maybe these subtypes does not exist, in the way the system makes it.

    The thing I'm thinking about, is that some functions go more together than others.

    When someone say intuitive thinker to me, I mostly think of someone + , I dont see as a very creative thinking process, and neigher do I see as very perceptive about people and situation. When I think of someone bright, quick and perceptive, I mostly think of the two functions of and , someone who have dominating , tend to be far more subjetive than someone with a dominating , those with dominant + tend to be the best observers, or that's how I see it. And talk about a creative thinker, and I've give you someone who is .
    When I think about a wanker, it's you.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  7. #7
    Creepy-

    Default Re: About jungs 8 types

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    A thing I've thought about, is that the 16 types systems take a lot of things for granted.

    Maybe these subtypes does not exist, in the way the system makes it.

    The thing I'm thinking about, is that some functions go more together than others.

    When someone say intuitive thinker to me, I mostly think of someone + , I dont see as a very creative thinking process, and neigher do I see as very perceptive about people and situation. When I think of someone bright, quick and perceptive, I mostly think of the two functions of and , someone who have dominating , tend to be far more subjetive than someone with a dominating , those with dominant + tend to be the best observers, or that's how I see it. And talk about a creative thinker, and I've give you someone who is .
    When I think about a wanker, it's you.
    You are such a funny guy. I read a post by you on some other site, you are not an enneagram 7, now why the hell would you think you are?

  8. #8
    Creepy-pokeball

    Default

    I want a stalker =(

    /jealous

  9. #9
    Joy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    SEE-Se
    Posts
    24,501
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jadae
    I want a stalker =(

    /jealous
    SEE-Se, 852 sx/so

    Check out my Socionics group! https://www.facebook.com/groups/1546362349012193/

  10. #10
    Creepy-pokeball

    Default

    Sorry lol. I was being a smart ass. Read the post above me

    ps. they need more emoticons to show some of the more difficult expressions like sarcasm or constipation.

  11. #11
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,631
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: About jungs 8 types

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    Quote Originally Posted by FDG
    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    A thing I've thought about, is that the 16 types systems take a lot of things for granted.

    Maybe these subtypes does not exist, in the way the system makes it.

    The thing I'm thinking about, is that some functions go more together than others.

    When someone say intuitive thinker to me, I mostly think of someone + , I dont see as a very creative thinking process, and neigher do I see as very perceptive about people and situation. When I think of someone bright, quick and perceptive, I mostly think of the two functions of and , someone who have dominating , tend to be far more subjetive than someone with a dominating , those with dominant + tend to be the best observers, or that's how I see it. And talk about a creative thinker, and I've give you someone who is .
    When I think about a wanker, it's you.
    You are such a funny guy. I read a post by you on some other site, you are not an enneagram 7, now why the hell would you think you are?
    Because I identify with the description, maybe? omg what a surprising reply!
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  12. #12
    Creepy-

    Default

    That's why everyone should get someone else to type them, someone real life with good typing skills, not someone from the net.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •