Results 1 to 40 of 53

Thread: Carl Jung on Introverted Sensing Si

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,430
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ArchonAlarion View Post
    The Ni description does not mention time, only the Si description.
    Well in his book Tavistock Lectures he calls intuition 'Time'.

    And if I remember it correctly he mentions Time for Ni in his book psychological types at least once. (yes I agree it's not much)

    But then again, time isn't that a great definition for Ni. Future is a better word etc.

    Though I agree that Jung has some other akward ideas about Ni. But whatever, he uses dichotomies so he gets at the right type anyways.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    TIM
    /
    Posts
    7,041
    Mentioned
    177 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I was thinking Jung's Si description was interesting... I haven't finalized my thoughts on the matter. But in any case, I do think it's important to consider whether Jung's Si and Socionics Si are the same thing; and if they overlap, to what degree? To simply say "Si is this" and post a Jung description is not a critical evaluation of the matter. And had you switched it to being "Ni" I think people would have recognized the source anyway (I hope anyway) and so it wouldn't have worked. The main question is why are you so insistent that Jungian-defined functions = Socionics IM precisely, or are you? I need to look into it more and that's why I'm not giving an opinion, because I'm being lazy, but my suspicion so far is that there is some overlap. I also have been thinking about Ni pertaining to time for a while, and haven't finalized my thoughts on this either.

  3. #3

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loki View Post
    I was thinking Jung's Si description was interesting... I haven't finalized my thoughts on the matter. But in any case, I do think it's important to consider whether Jung's Si and Socionics Si are the same thing; and if they overlap, to what degree? To simply say "Si is this" and post a Jung description is not a critical evaluation of the matter. And had you switched it to being "Ni" I think people would have recognized the source anyway (I hope anyway) and so it wouldn't have worked. The main question is why are you so insistent that Jungian-defined functions = Socionics IM precisely, or are you? I need to look into it more and that's why I'm not giving an opinion, because I'm being lazy, but my suspicion so far is that there is some overlap. I also have been thinking about Ni pertaining to time for a while, and haven't finalized my thoughts on this either.
    well the si description has a lot in common with ni since ni is always matching things to unconscious meanings.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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