Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Extroverted Thinking

  1. #1
    Creepy-

    Default Extroverted Thinking

    Does this help explain the difference between Gamma and Delta ?

    Gamma tends towards theosophy (i.e. spirituality)
    Delta tends towards materialism (i.e. physiology)

  2. #2

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    M-H λ
    Posts
    2,609
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i don't think those things have anything to do with but maybe that is just me

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    i agree with ptl

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,763
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  5. #5
    Creepy-

    Default

    (This is kind of negative but there are positive things earlier in the chapter. It doesn't describe "healthy" thinking, rather when extraverted thinking has taken a back seat.)

    From "The Collected Works of C.G. Jung", vol.6 "Psychological Types", chapter X, p353

    The destructive quality of this thinking, as well as its limited usefulness on occasion, does not need stressing. But there is still another form of negative thinking, which at first glances might not be recognised as such, and that is theosophical thinking, which today is rapidly spreading in all parts of the world, presumably in reaction to the materialism of the recent past. Theosophical thinking has an air that is not in the least reductive, since it exalts everything to a transcendental and world embracing idea. A dream, fo instance, is no longer just a dream, but an experience "on another plane." The hitherto inexplicable fact of telepathy is very simply explained as "vibrations" passing from one person to another. An ordinary nervous complaint is explained by the fact that something has collided with the "astral body". Certain ethnological peculiarities of the dwellers on the Atlantic seaboard are easily accounted for by the submergence of Atlantis, and so on. We have only to open a theosophical book to be overwhelmed that everything is already explained, and that "spiritual science" has left no enigmas unsolved. But, at bottom, this kin dof thinking is just as negative as materialistic thinking. When the latter regards psychology as chemical changes in the ganglia or as the extrusion and retraction of cell-pseudopodia or as an internal secretion, this is just as much a superstition as theosophy. The only difference is that materialism reduces everything to physiology, whereas theosophy reduces everything to Indian metaphysics. When a dream is traced back to an overloaded stomach, this is no explanation of the dream, and when we explain telepathy as vibrations we have said just as little. For what are "vibrations"? Not only are both methods of explanation futile, they are actually destructive, because by diverting interest away from the main issue, in one case the stomach and in the other to imaginary vibrations, they hamper any serious investigation of the problem by a bogus explanation. Either kind of thinking is sterile and sterilizing. Its negative quality is due to the fact that it is so indescribably cheap, impoverished, and lacking in creative energy, It is a thinking taken in tow by other functions.
    (Am I the only one who thinks ILIs can tend to be theosophical?)

  6. #6
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well I can be "theosophical"(I hate the word, because it conjures up the image of a sleazy new age crystal hugger, which i dont consider myself to be) in the sense that I am interested in the occult, but I dont really beleive in everything I read, unlike my cousin, whos also ILI and shes alot more into it than I am. Ok I admit I beleive alot of stuff most people would find bizarre, and unscientific, so sue me.

    I agree with Jung in that paragraph only in so much that any form of thinking is cheap and unscientific. There is no form of thought which does not rest on assumtion of some sort, be it "official" or not. I have my reasons for beleiving what I do, just like quantum mechanics has its reasons for being popular, even though it is not true on a theoretical level. I do agree that in the occult and new age worlds there is a lack of critical thinking, however, I dont beleive religion should found itself purely on critical thinking, that would just be science and not religion. Religion is about teaching people values, and poetic and hermetic forms of expression often get deeper into peoples souls than mathematical calculations ever could.

    What makes you think that ILIs are more into cheasy new agey thinking than other types, btw?

  7. #7
    Olga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,596
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Young?

    I did not read Young, thanks for posting it.
    I think what he wanted to say is actually about extreames. Why sould we go this pass if the world is not just spirituality and not just material but both and that is why it is precious, it is Life. Balance is the answer and socion is the answer too, people need to anderstand each other better and accept that somebody's weakness is somebody's strength (Love) - together we can do a lot.
    School of Associative socionics: http://socionics4you.com/

  8. #8
    Olga's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    1,596
    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Quadras

    I forgot to say about . I think the difference between Gamma and Delta is in Extraversion/introversion dimension versus
    School of Associative socionics: http://socionics4you.com/

  9. #9
    Creepy-

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheerio
    What makes you think that ILIs are more into cheasy new agey thinking than other types, btw?
    Observation :wink: . Even those ILIs who aren't into that kind of thinking are certainly less disdainful of it than most other types.

    I also see similar things in LIEs, so perhaps it is the influence of . I can certainly see how + could lend itself to the materialist type of thinking.

    @Olga: I agree that they are both extremes. People don't tend to be "balanced", they tend to have a bias one way or another, my idea was that this was how was biased in Gamma vs. Delta.

  10. #10
    MysticSonic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,993
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I've seen INTps that were pretty damn critical of new-age bull.
    "To become is just like falling asleep. You never know exactly when it happens, the transition, the magic, and you think, if you could only recall that exact moment of crossing the line then you would understand everything; you would see it all"

    "Angels dancing on the head of a pin dissolve into nothingness at the bedside of a dying child."

  11. #11
    Creepy-

    Default

    Semantic difference:

    crit·i·cal
    adj.

    1. Inclined to judge severely and find fault.
    dis·dain
    tr.v. dis·dained, dis·dain·ing, dis·dains

    1. To regard or treat with haughty contempt; despise. See Synonyms at despise.
    2. To consider or reject as beneath oneself.


    n.

    A feeling or show of contempt and aloofness; scorn.
    It's quite possible to be critical without disdain.

  12. #12
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Extroverted Thinking

    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Does this help explain the difference between Gamma and Delta ?

    Gamma tends towards theosophy (i.e. spirituality)
    Delta tends towards materialism (i.e. physiology)
    This is interesting. First I wasn't sure if I agree. ENFPs and INFJs inclined towards materialism? Hng? Whatchatalkingabout? ... But I'm beginning to see your point.

    Discovering the material side of things helps me to navigate life. How bad moods "work", for example. How it all ties in with exposure to sunlight, with the kinds of food you eat, with how much sleep you've got. How several little situations that disappoint you or make you feel like a failure can, if they happen in a row, build up a bad mood. So what you can do is expose yourself to situations that counteract this. Etc etc etc. Finding out about this feels, to me, like a relief - like very good news. I feel more comfortable with that kind of thing than with any "esoteric" explanation of bad moods. Not sure what that could be. Perhaps stuff like the gemstones associated with your birthday. I've got an instinctive, in-built distrust of that kind of stuff.

    So I've got a certain positive bias towards materialism, and a negative bias towards teosophy. Or is saying this an over-simplification? Perhaps it's interesting for the purposes of this thread to note why this particular Delta has this kind of bias.

    My Fe is subconscious, i.e. I'm not as comfortable using it as you guys. Same thing for Ni, and Ni includes symbolism. So anything that involves those things a LOT is kind of uncomfortable, at times even scary. It involves a loss of control. (After all, it's to do with my subconscious functions - the ones I can't control consciously.) So of course I'll shy away from any teosophic stuff. "Materialism" gives me a way of navigating inexplicable and scary stuff. It makes it understandable, manageable, and less scary. Bad moods as a result of bad karma - urk. Bad moods as a result of not yet having had lunch - yup, I can deal with that.
    My bias probably has also to do with my desire to understand things. (Wasn't this ENFPs' hidden agenda?) Whenever I learn something, or are told to do something, I need first to understand why something is necessary. Materialism (in this kind of context) gives me more food for thought; it's easier to see through and understand. Teosophy can't be explained - it's based on hypotheses I can neither understand nor verify, but would have to believe because I'm told to believe them.*

    *DISCLAIMER. This is how things present themselves to me. Another person is probably able to understand and verify teosophy.

  13. #13
    Creepy-

    Default

    Wow. I actually hadn't considered that -- I was considering the STs/NTs pretty much on their own.

    Thankyou for your perspective! It adds a whole new dimension to the idea.

  14. #14
    schrödinger's cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    1,186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You're welcome. I've got a translation job again and was procrastinating - I always get good ideas when I'm procrastinating. I'm using this as a technique. Whenever I'm stuck in a project, I give myself an unpleasant duty I must do instead, and hey presto...

  15. #15
    Hiding Typhon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Valhalla
    TIM
    Ni-ENFj
    Posts
    2,645
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Re: Young?

    Quote Originally Posted by Olga
    I did not read Young, thanks for posting it.
    I think what he wanted to say is actually about extreames. Why sould we go this pass if the world is not just spirituality and not just material but both and that is why it is precious, it is Life. Balance is the answer and socion is the answer too, people need to anderstand each other better and accept that somebody's weakness is somebody's strength (Love) - together we can do a lot.
    I agree, I think he was mainly criticisizing how people can get so caught up in a way of thinking that it shuts out any form of insight or open mindedness towards anything new, (which is the root of science as well as spirituality if you ask me) and that people who are spiritual tend to do this all the while criticising the scientific community for doing the same thing.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Quote Originally Posted by schrödinger's cat
    Quote Originally Posted by ishysquishy
    Does this help explain the difference between Gamma and Delta ?

    Gamma tends towards theosophy (i.e. spirituality)
    Delta tends towards materialism (i.e. physiology)
    This is interesting. First I wasn't sure if I agree. ENFPs and INFJs inclined towards materialism? Hng? Whatchatalkingabout? ... But I'm beginning to see your point.

    Discovering the material side of things helps me to navigate life. How bad moods "work", for example. How it all ties in with exposure to sunlight, with the kinds of food you eat, with how much sleep you've got. How several little situations that disappoint you or make you feel like a failure can, if they happen in a row, build up a bad mood. So what you can do is expose yourself to situations that counteract this. Etc etc etc. Finding out about this feels, to me, like a relief - like very good news. I feel more comfortable with that kind of thing than with any "esoteric" explanation of bad moods. Not sure what that could be. Perhaps stuff like the gemstones associated with your birthday. I've got an instinctive, in-built distrust of that kind of stuff.

    So I've got a certain positive bias towards materialism, and a negative bias towards teosophy. Or is saying this an over-simplification? Perhaps it's interesting for the purposes of this thread to note why this particular Delta has this kind of bias.

    My Fe is subconscious, i.e. I'm not as comfortable using it as you guys. Same thing for Ni, and Ni includes symbolism. So anything that involves those things a LOT is kind of uncomfortable, at times even scary. It involves a loss of control. (After all, it's to do with my subconscious functions - the ones I can't control consciously.) So of course I'll shy away from any teosophic stuff. "Materialism" gives me a way of navigating inexplicable and scary stuff. It makes it understandable, manageable, and less scary. Bad moods as a result of bad karma - urk. Bad moods as a result of not yet having had lunch - yup, I can deal with that.
    My bias probably has also to do with my desire to understand things. (Wasn't this ENFPs' hidden agenda?) Whenever I learn something, or are told to do something, I need first to understand why something is necessary. Materialism (in this kind of context) gives me more food for thought; it's easier to see through and understand. Teosophy can't be explained - it's based on hypotheses I can neither understand nor verify, but would have to believe because I'm told to believe them.*

    *DISCLAIMER. This is how things present themselves to me. Another person is probably able to understand and verify teosophy.
    I have two thoughts to add.

    1. That I agree that is about symbolism and that as a result I can really make sense of events through abstract symbols. However, since I have as a role function, I can also seek the physical causes behind my state of being. Feeling a certain way, or behaving in a certain way because you are guided by an archetype in your subconsious makes sense to me, but it also makes sense that my bad moods are generally caused by lack of food or, motivation caused by built up sexual desire etc.

    2. I think the name "theosophy" is pretty bad, because theosophy is actually a specific school of occult thought that existed during the late 19th and early 20th centuries founded on the teachings of a Russian woman named Helena Blvatsky who challenged the assumptions of modern science due to what industrial society was doing to humanity at the time(child labor etc), and thus the name "theosophy" is used here as a refernce to any form of occult thinking which scorns modern science However, the occult sciences should not all be placed under the umbrella of theosophy, thats like saying all of psychology is MBTI.

    The occult sciences are actually the purest form of science known to man, as they are the precursor of all the exact sciences. Or do you really think scientific immuminism could have existed without the gnostics, hermetics, sorcerers and later on alchemists, magicians, philosophers, astrologists, and other now-called "pseudo scientists" who preceded them?

  16. #16
    Creepy-

    Default

    Well, I didn't pick the words - I took them straight from Jung (the translation, anyway).

Posting Permissions

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