Jungian Psychology

[Airman]

I've read some introductory and also some briefings on Jung's Psychoanalysis, which is somewhat different from Freud's.

I opened this thread so that we can share links and info about Jungian Psychology.

here are a few:

Jung's therapy method on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuation#Carl_Jung

on Jung's concept of 'Shadow': http://jungian.org/page3.html

Here's a menu on all Jungian psychology pages on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Categor...ian_psychology

I hope we can share more knowledge here on Jungian views.

[xerx]

Jung was a charlatan who disbelieved in interpreting statistical data, though had no problems accepting his own confirmation-biased, anecdotal observations.


Also, Jung was an introverted thinking ( = Ti ) and intuitive type according to his own opinion. ( PWND: @niffweed et al. who say he's Ni )

[GuavaDrunk]

Se doth not believe in statistics - empiricism of the mind ftw, none of this wooly statistical bullshit.

[kadda1212]

For those who understand German: http://arbeitsblaetter.stangl-taller...GEN/Jung.shtml

[strrrng]

Jung was a charlatan who disbelieved in interpreting statistical data, though had no problems accepting his own confirmation-biased, anecdotal observations.


Also, Jung was an introverted thinking ( = Ti ) and intuitive type according to his own opinion. ( PWND: @niffweed et al. who say he's Ni )

I have a hard time seeing an Ne-ego/strong Te type becoming so immersed in mythological/cultural undercurrents and their real world parallels (read the red book and tell me you still think he's Ti-dominant) that ideas like the collective unconscious (which is abstract fields to the max imo) and synchronicity (also reflective of a more holistic, intuitive bent) would come about. the fact that he typed himself as a logical type with strong intuition is no less surprising than his claiming to be an empiricist... you have to take the state of psychology as a whole in the age that he was operating in into account (especially since functions, as he developed them, were seen more concretely, i.e. having a secondary ethical function and still valuing/utilizing Ti effectively would be meaningless...). according to him the introverted thinker loses himself in the labyrinth of his ideas, whereas the introverted intuitor is captivated by his vision... would it not make sense, then, that the latter could be infused with the former, in socionics terms? freud in my opinion would be a good Ti-ego example... there's an added reductionism to his methodology, the context is established inductively, and causal relations proceed from there (negativist, involutionary); with jung the context is more implied, and the focus is more on synthesizing elements than weighing and appraising their value (positivist). there's an unspoken sense of intuition he seems to expect of his readers, which is completely lacking in freud, who both accepts the divergent nature of many case studies, but anchors them with a more consistent framework. overall I think you underestimate jung... and didn't you say freud was an idiot, lol? who do you think is valid then, and how would you type freud.

[Trevor]

waste of time

[xerx]

I have a hard time seeing an Ne-ego/strong Te type ...

If the theory's own author is wrong about his type, then there is no hope for the socionics at all. That is, unless Jungian functions and socionics elements are totally different, in which case Jung would become extremely irrelevant except as a launch point - e.g. in the sense that chemistry is related to alchemy - i.e. not in a good sense.

[mu4]

Jung is a very clear introvert, it was always difficult for him to create distance between his work and his own experiences and often his own experiences dramatically shifted his work.

His terminology and way of explaining things is often quite esoteric and mystical in character, as was his direction in life. Socionics is more or less a extroverted interpretation of Jung and Freud associated with physics by analogy and information science/computer science(cybernetics in USSR at that time) by terminology.

While Jung delved deeply into his own personal experience and individual experience of the various types often in a imaginative and esoteric manner, Socionics is largely devoid of these features, and discusses the material outcomes of differences in information preference between many individuals in interaction.

Jung is not a great scientist, but he's insightful person and one has to read him as that of a introvert, with a very distinct and unique experience of the world.

[Pookie]

He was Ti in a system where Ti is under INTP.

[mu4]

If the theory's own author is wrong about his type, then there is no hope for the socionics at all. That is, unless Jungian functions and socionics elements are totally different, in which case Jung would become extremely irrelevant except as a launch point - e.g. in the sense that chemistry is related to alchemy - i.e. not in a good sense.

Jung could easily to be LII or IEI, I do not see him as an ILI.

I don't see either as being incompatible with socionics, it is however clear that Jung had very strong .

LII has 4-d which is a world-view function, this would be one of the major foundations of how he saw the world. He often talked about introversion as symbol, images and dreams and imo this is how much of his life was.

The fact that he wrote a text such as the Red Book is indicative of strong as well.

However we should not think this means ego, because in Socionics man is not mere ego, all 4 blocks play equal roles in the development of an individual although the ego is the most relevant public persona.

The Red Book was a unpublished book and Jung did not attempt in his life to be a mystic but a scientist, the nature of his psychology was analytic and rational and not intuitive. Also, The Red Book he himself termed a extended and voluntary confrontation with the unconscious.

Now if taken at his word, this would fit a 4-d individual who presented a 4-d individual as a persona.

I think it's important to understand how powerful the 8th function is in one's world view, this is a reason why ILE types are materialists driven by a material interpretation of the world and ILI are at best skepticists driven by doubt.

[MisterNi]

I've read a few of his books and it's obvious he's an type. His description of seems to fit well with an ILI which would make him:

MBTI: INTJ
Socionics: ILI

At any rate, this is a topic that shouldn't be rehashed. It's pretty clear that Jung was a neurotic mess when he wrote his books on psychology. His books are archaic and today he is simply mentioned in typology circles for posterity. My guess is that he was simply trolling the types who were trying to emulate him.

[strrrng]

If the theory's own author is wrong about his type, then there is no hope for the socionics at all. That is, unless Jungian functions and socionics elements are totally different, in which case Jung would become extremely irrelevant except as a launch point - e.g. in the sense that chemistry is related to alchemy - i.e. not in a good sense.

whatever. pouring out a mythical tome that analogizes self-induced, hallucinatory visions with the collective mind leading up to the war's psychic constitution doesn't exactly point to Ti-dominant.

It happened in October of the year 1913 as I was leaving alone
for a journey; that during the day I was suddenly overcome in
broad daylight by a vision: I saw a terrible flood that covered all
the northern and low-lying lands between the North Sea and the
Alps. It reached from England up to Russia, and from the coast of
the North Sea right up to the Alps. I saw yellow waves, swimming
rubble, and the death of countless thousands.
...
I see a gray rock face along which I sink into great depths.
I stand in black dirt up to my ankles in a dark cave. Shadows
sweep over me. I am seized by fear, but I know I must go in.
I crawl through a narrow crack in the rock and reach an inner
cave whose bottom is covered with black water. But beyond this I
catch a glimpse of a luminous red stone which I must reach. I wade
through the muddy water. The cave is full of the frightful noise
of shrieking voices. I take the stone, it covers a dark opening in the
rock. I hold the stone in my hand, peering around inquiringly. I do
not want to listen to the voices, they keep me away But I want to
know. Here something wants to be uttered. I place my ear to the
opening. I hear the flow of underground waters. I see the bloody
head of a man on the dark stream. Someone wounded, someone
slain floats there. I talce in this image for a long time, shuddering.
I see a large black scarab floating past on the dark stream.

sound like an LII?

[strrrng]

8th function...

the is to be found more in the way he goes about conveying these experiences, and to a lesser degree, that they occurred. being "strong" in an unconscious, devalued function doesn't exactly lead one into realms and modes of thinking directly associated with it... though this *does* often happen with the hidden agenda function (the suggestion of him somehow aspiring to is pathetically laughable), and he did have quite an emphasis on being an empiricist in an age tainted by myopic materialism (i.e. social necessity and a need for consistency... his ideas are hardly 'scientific'). one may as well posit Ti-LSI, as the focus would actually make sense.

[mu4]

whatever. pouring out a mythical tome that analogizes self-induced, hallucinatory visions with the collective mind leading up to the war's psychic constitution doesn't exactly point to Ti-dominant.

sound like an LII?

Sure Winston Churchill painted, and I put out -tastic programs and talk about making investments and things like that.

However none of this matters as far as one's persona, and a picture of oneself presented to the world.

As I said before the 8th function is a world view function, although it's devalued, it's not like the 7th function which is much more hidden. The 8th function is 4d and fundamental to how one views the world, one might not prefer this, but one will still feel it important to deal with this part of life. Taking it from his words, his work the Red Book was a confrontation with the unconscious and this was the basis of imo much of his later life, it has adversarial connotations.

I think people regularly take too much emphasis in devalued vs valued. The Ego is just the persona, the Id is something much more primal and core, something that's is only barely tamed by the social defenses one creates.

Anyways you can think of Jung as whatever type you want, but it's clearly evident imo he has as a 4d function.

[kadda1212]

Just a nice little song about Freud.

Es war um 1872 in Wien,
(Around the year 1872 in Vienna)
so'n Typ namens Siegmund lebte in unserer Straße,
(there lives a guy called Siegmund in our street)
Er trug eine Brille, studierte Medizin,
(he wore glasses, studied medicine)
ich kann gar nicht sagen, wie sehr ich ihn hasse.
(I can't even tell you, how much I hated him)
Er schlug mich am Flipper, er schlug mich im Schach,
(He beat me at pinball, he beat me at chess)
er schlug mich bei jeder erdenklichen Sache.
(He beat me at everything you could think of)
Die Niederlagen ihrerseits schlugen mir nach und nach
(Over time those defeats really made me feel down)
auf mein Gemüt - und ich schwörte Rache!
(and I swore to take revenge)
Ich stahl seine Schlüssel, lockte ihn aus dem Haus,
(I stole his keys, lured him out of his house)
um durch die Verandatür einzusteigen,
(in order to break through his backdoor)
mein Herz klopfte Sturm, denn ich wusste es genau,
(my heart was beating like a drum, and I knew exactly)
dieses eine Mal würde ich's ihm zeigen,
(this time I would leave a mark)
und so hab ich Siegmund Freuds Schachbrett zerknickt,
(and thus I buckled Siegmund Freud's chess board)
1:0 für mich - psychologischer Sieg!
(1:0 for me - psychological victory!)

[xerx]

whatever. pouring out a mythical tome that analogizes self-induced, hallucinatory visions with the collective mind leading up to the war's psychic constitution doesn't exactly point to Ti-dominant.
sound like an LII?

You could be right. Ti and Introverted Thinking would have to be different things. Or hkkmr could be right about the strength of 4-D functions.

[strrrng]

Sure Winston Churchill painted, and I put out -tastic programs and talk about making investments and things like that.

However none of this matters as far as one's persona, and a picture of oneself presented to the world.

yes, and -demonstratives produce spiritual tomes laden with .

As I said before the 8th function is a world view function, although it's devalued, it's not like the 7th function which is much more hidden. The 8th function is 4d and fundamental to how one views the world, one might not prefer this, but one will still feel it important to deal with this part of life. Taking it from his words, his work the Red Book was a confrontation with the unconscious and this was the basis of imo much of his later life, it has adversarial connotations.

I find it less likely that an LII spent years pouring over the mythical, religious and philosophical underpinnings of various cultures due to the strength of a function he didn't necessarily "prefer to deal with," than an IEI with a heavy emphasis on became enmeshed in the study of subjects naturally up his alley. the red book as both the most esoteric and the foundation for his later works testifies to the latter, imo.

I think people regularly take too much emphasis in devalued vs valued. The Ego is just the persona, the Id is something much more primal and core, something that's is only barely tamed by the social defenses one creates.

the ego is not persona; taken in tandem with the superego it can refer to persona; but it's ultimately the foundation. valued/unvalued matters because it qualifies how a function is "used," there's always more of a direct feedback between valued functions. without this dichotomy, every correlate of functions would become meaningless.

[mu4]

yes, and -demonstratives produce spiritual tomes laden with .

Imo creatives can be very esoteric/religious and mystical individuals. They don't have the same materialist mindset of 4d types.

I've observed many LII religious scholars and such as well. It's no surprise that even in Christianity, Logos is God.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos_(Christianity)

Also plenty of ILE's have written laden textbooks. The red book is unpublished until 2009 by his family, his professional psychology work is fairly dry and not esoteric imo.

Also as a point, he was possibly very much a valuing individual as the whole of his life, he was quite focused on health. Specifically mental health. Also for a individual, their purpose in life is to to fulfill their innate potential. These are not incompatible with and types.

I can certainly accept Jung as IEI, this is imo a consistant typing for him as well.