As I see it, the process of individuation -- its internal, graduated aspect at least -- infers that most of us learn to find peace with ourselves as we get older, effectively mitigating our faults bit by bit through direct interaction with the subconscious ranges of information which take vengence for our having them. Of course the bit-by-bit part is only a conscious effort to try to understand the subconscious on consciousness' terms. Ultimately we must be willing to let the subconscious have a say in our considerations to really understand it, but in all likelyhood the capacity to do so is a genetically induced transformation made possible by changes in the relationship between brain regions and the flow of chemicals between them. The brain has a lot of self-regulating mechanisms which are very difficult to overcome, so in normal people at least the potential for personality change is limited.
According to Jung, "man" becomes more interested in cultural pursuits when he enters his second half of life. Under psychic domain theory, Jung, as a liberal universalist, would be referring to man as progressive universalism. (obviously "man" would not be referring to the adaptists and traditionalists, whom have a strong interest in culture as a regulator of behavior throughout their lives.) This is an important change because it is on the matter of the opposing axis that the two poles of an axis can agree: specialists and universalists both stand to lose from a social program that exhalts life above experience (see communism), and traditionalists and adaptists can see the problems with a lifestyle that holds psychological matters of ideology and internal contentedness above imminent existential concerns. (consider modern indepedent critiques of the two party system in the United States, and too, its vulnerability to Sept. 11.) Each axis agrees on a middle ground by which to meet its opposite. The effective outcome of say, a universalist and a specialist learning to put aside their negative projections of each other to take a common stand on cultural trends (the apparent substance of American politics), is a permanent. I believe this happens because one learns/acquires the ability to let the dual-seeking function act as a direct advisor to the role function, thus enabling a cross-domain receptivity to 5th function content as a means of determining one's role. Although I can't offer a lot of specifics right now, the essence of the change is a permanent relationship between yourself and all of your duals across all domains, meaning that even among your ideosyncratic opposition, one out of 16 of them have your back, and will vouch for your usefulness to them.
The way I see it, most of us are going to learn to put our differences aside someday anyhow, so why not make the good faith effort to understand people the way of individuation is gonna bring you into reconciliation with anyway? On the other hand, there appear to be some people who are lacking the ability altogether to process all eight domain perspectives of a given subconscious function. These people can't engage you in reconcilation at all: their biases make any meeting of the minds very difficult, if not impossible. I refer to these people as immanent, because they desire total psychic domain/dyad purity in their functions, looking at everything that is even indirectly antagonistic to their native domain as a kind of blight to be purged at all costs.
I suspect a lot of the hostility on this forum is due to the efforts of immanent persons. (I'm talking about Phaedrus in particular.)
Reply With Quote
INFp-Ni
Originally Posted by BulletsAndDoves
Actually there is an interesting variety of types working in string theory, more than for say, QM or general relativity. (you can tell a person's type by the metaphors they use in their writing).
:wink:
ALPHA
