About jungs 8 types

[Creepy-]

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 .

[Rocky]

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.

[mimisor]

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

[Creepy-]

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.

[Rocky]

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

Jung talked about dominant and secondary funcitons. He also briefly mentioned repressed (3 & 5) functions.

[FDG]

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.

[Creepy-]

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?

[Creepy-pokeball]

I want a stalker =(

/jealous

[Joy]

I want a stalker =(

/jealous

[Creepy-pokeball]

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.

[FDG]

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!

[Creepy-]

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