Carl Jung's type

[Nephilthoth]

Quite frankly, I think he was full of shit. There was never any effort to substantiate his theories or conclusions. I don't think he is Te valuing.

[godslave]

Some indications about his type in this very interesting Joseph Wheelwright interview.

[InterPrizeWes]

He is using Ni rather than Ne, not so whacky with playful overlays or rose colored fantasies, instead more prophetic and insightful.

[thistle]

It's difficult for me to see Carl Jung as a NF type. Based on other's experiences meeting him I get the impression he was charismatic and even had a sardonic(?) sense of humour, but the concept of a dark side of human nature being integrated into a wholeness still seems a detached or "cold" in a way, because it's so abstract.

If he were a Ni ego type would he encounter greater or less difficulty in describing Ni, compared to Ne ego type?

[Expansion]

It's difficult for me to see Carl Jung as a NF type. Based on other's experiences meeting him I get the impression he was charismatic and even had a sardonic(?) sense of humour, but the concept of a dark side of human nature being integrated into a wholeness still seems a detached or "cold" in a way, because it's so abstract.

If he were a Ni ego type would he encounter greater or less difficulty in describing Ni, compared to Ne ego type?

Rather than doing functions, try to imagine an ILI or LlI doing the feeling thing with people, and understanding them wholly, and a 'giver counselor par excellence'.

Fe at the bottom is trouble for the type. They expect others to Fe for them.

Or ILI with PoLR Fe, which they dont understand very well.

Jung was a passionate counselor one on one with people.

See where it kinda of leads, thistle?

[thistle]

Rather than doing functions, try to imagine an ILI or LlI doing the feeling thing with people, and understanding them wholly, and a 'giver counselor par excellence'.

Fe at the bottom is trouble for the type. They expect others to Fe for them.

Or ILI with PoLR Fe, which they dont understand very well.

Jung was a passionate counselor one on one with people.

See where it kinda of leads, thistle?

True, when I think about counsellors met during my life I can recall many ethical types: a career guidance counsellor who was possibly IEE (or SEE?) - she was very breezy, dressed colourfully and had a lot of faith in people's capabilities. I've met with a youth counsellor who I think was ESE. There are others I have met, and while I didn't get to know them well enough to type them our dynamic felt more like relating back and forth as in a friendship and I was able to open up with them because of their inclusiveness.

In the interview godslave linked Joseph Wheelwright spoke about a female patient who was in tears throughout an appointment with Jung. Jung didn't respond or relate to her, instead he took out a newspaper and started reading it. Jung later told her upfront that she may want to return when she's able to speak more than cry, so that their appointment could be helpful. That may be an extreme, isolated incident but it seems a callous or "tough love" act from Jung.

Considering all of the new patients he would be introduced to, I agree that would be tiring for LII or ILI, feeling vulnerable in new one-on-one situations.
Maybe if the appointment is more structured, it would be more akin to visiting a GP?

How about the way Jung's mind was able to fathom the divisions between the "types", the divisions seems like Ti. He understood people but I think he had ability to do so without relating things back to his own self or being too biased?

I can see him as using Ti and having great interest exploring Ni related subjects, or, it's the opposite way around.

[Expansion]

True, when I think about counsellors met during my life I can recall many ethical types: a career guidance counsellor who was possibly IEE (or SEE?) - she was very breezy, dressed colourfully and had a lot of faith in people's capabilities. I've met with a youth counsellor who I think was ESE. There are others I have met, and while I didn't get to know them well enough to type them our dynamic felt more like relating back and forth as in a friendship and I was able to open up with them because of their inclusiveness.

In the interview godslave linked Joseph Wheelwright spoke about a female patient who was in tears throughout an appointment with Jung. Jung didn't respond or relate to her, instead he took out a newspaper and started reading it. Jung later told her upfront that she may want to return when she's able to speak more than cry, so that their appointment could be helpful. That may be an extreme, isolated incident but it seems a callous or "tough love" act from Jung.

Considering all of the new patients he would be introduced to, I agree that would be tiring for LII or ILI, feeling vulnerable in new one-on-one situations.
Maybe if the appointment is more structured, it would be more akin to visiting a GP?

How about the way Jung's mind was able to fathom the divisions between the "types", the divisions seems like Ti. He understood people but I think he had ability to do so without relating things back to his own self or being too biased?

I can see him as using Ti and having great interest exploring Ni related subjects, or, it's the opposite way around.

Wife is your type and her sister is ESE, and the newspaper training is like when they ignore the kids when they are trying to manipulate.

It's purposeful and it yields something.
___________________<<<_________________<_____
If people here get pithy posts I'm on my phone, pecking is madness.

[thistle]

Wife is your type and her sister is ESE, and the newspaper training is like when they ignore the kids when they are trying to manipulate.

It's purposeful and it yields something.
___________________<<<_________________<_____
If people here get pithy posts I'm on my phone, pecking is madness.

I follow your point about teaching a lesson, though it's not something I like to identify within myself ...
Doing that to someone upon first meeting them, within in a therapeutic setting, is not the same as with people you're in a close knit relationship with though.
So now I am curious, which types do you think are possible for Jung?

[Expansion]

I follow your point about teaching a lesson, though it's not something I like to identify within myself ...
Doing that to someone upon first meeting them, within in a therapeutic setting, is not the same as with people you're in a close knit relationship with though.
So now I am curious, which types do you think are possible for Jung?

Introverted intuitive.

He's not T as we noted.

So:

EII vs IEI

IEI because he goes in with the collective unconscious with symbolism and archetypes. Not Ne, ever. Animus and the others is invisible to Ne. Those things he saw give rise to behavior, Ne sees those movements and frames disparate trajectories isomorphism style. It's like Se, everything is seen.

Ne is the conscious collective. Just like you see me here frame 1 literal/actual object into another analogously.


Re Office setting. A T type could have walked out, or asked them to leave, but he was with them. He could have hugged her, but that would be trouble. Headlines: Jung and Young, Disaster in the Office.

Not all F men are warm, though. Some T men are warm. I'm compassionate myself.

[Not A Communist Shill]

I don't believe in the functions, but Jung was arguably too into mysticism and other non-empirical things to be a -type. He seems like a fairly clear irrational to me. While I type him IEI, I could see him as a "logical" type, just probably not in a way compatible with classical Socionics.

[CR400AF]

I can see him as using Ti and having great interest exploring Ni related subjects, or, it's the opposite way around.

In the ancient time, there are much more mystical things. Does that means ancient people are mostly Ni-egos? I don't think so.

IMO it's not correct to type someone according to the theme of his or her works. A similar situation is that many tend to divide Ti/Te according to the contents of the thinking, which is opposed by Jung himself.

There are some linkage between interests and Jungian types. But there are also a large number of other factors: the family background, the education, the time and the era etc.

[Renna]

Now I think LII. His Ti seem too much for IEI, and digging too much into the mystical realm and take it seriously seem not very Te.

But the main reason is his face doesn’t feel Fi value much.

[thistle]

In the ancient time, there are much more mystical things. Does that means ancient people are mostly Ni-egos? I don't think so.

IMO it's not correct to type someone according to the theme of his or her works. A similar situation is that many tend to divide Ti/Te according to the contents of the thinking, which is opposed by Jung himself.

There are some linkage between interests and Jungian types. But there are also a large number of other factors: the family background, the education, the time and the era etc.

Since you didn't specify how ancient or what sort of mystical things, I'm going to add some odd thoughts I've had about the topic.
Warning: I don't have much background knowledge, it's just something that seems interesting and curious to think/talk about.

If a phenomena had not yet been measured or quantified in any way, such as the changing weather conditions, I can understand how people in ancient times would find ways to rationalise what they were seeing and feeling. Weather instruments such as a barometer had not been invented yet, whereas nowadays we consider a weather forecast to convey -information to us even if the forecast is not always accurate. potential hydrogen or temperature seem like universally-agreed upon Te data to me. e.g Soil or drinking water is tested for its pH, and there is a decided "normal body temperature" range 36-37c upon which someone's state of health can be measured.

In the case of people in ancient times, without "measurements" to inform their forecasts they could form superstitions about the causes behind a downpour of rain.
Superstition carries a negative connotation though, and it seems more associated with Ni. But what if these people were reasoning through their experiences using logic, and in modern times we look back on their reasoning as illogical?

So I agree with what you are saying, ancient peoples were still making sense of things that were new to them just as we are doing so today. It doesn't make them disproportionately Ni-dominant types after all.

Regarding what you said about it not being correct to type someone according to the theme of their works. This is a good point, it's easy to do when you take a surface glance at a person. For example, it wasn't until I read more about Carl Jung's family that I learned his grandfather Carl Jung Sr. was a freemason and his father Paul Jung was a pastor.

Jung’s family had occult linkage on both sides, from his paternal grandfather’s Freemasonry involvement as Grandmaster of the Swiss Lodge (Jung and Jaffe, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, p. 232), and his maternal family’s long-term involvement with séances and ghosts. John Kerr, author of A Most Dangerous Method, comments that Jung was heavily involved for many years with his mother and two female cousins in hypnotically induced séances. Jung eventually wrote up the séances as his medical dissertation (John Kerr, A Most Dangerous Method: The Story of Jung, Freud, and Sabina Spielrein, 1993, pp. 50, 54).

(Passage taken from this website)

[hellohellohello]

Jung is LII

[Sol]

Jung is LII

In case you did not read his "good structured" texts expected for base T people, you've missed much of fun.

[InterPrizeWes]

Carl Jung is an Istp SLI, going by mechanics and structure with reason and calculation, not so fluttering or evanescent like Infj.