According Jung, elements are the opposite of your descriptions, extraverted IEs are objective, focused in the reality of the objects as it is and the whole, while Introverted IEs are subjective, partial, limited and distorted, focused in the self and how the object affect the personal experience, etc.
Introverted IEs
Extroverted IEs
Edit. But fortunately we all use 4D IEs introverted and extroverted.
Last edited by Faith; 06-17-2018 at 01:54 AM.
Yes, but I think Jung and Aushra were wrong.Originally Posted by Crystal
Jung: "The rationality of both types is orientated objectively, and depends upon objective data. Their reasonableness corresponds with what passes as reasonable from the collective standpoint."
2 + 3 = 5
... or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derivative
This information must be about Extroverted Thinking, right? But it doesn't work... Why are mathematicians usually LII?
I'm not fan of Jung, some of his descriptions lack objectivity imo,he portrayed as more positive IEs that he valued. Anyway, why do you think that Augusta and Jung were wrong?
I think that extraversion is focused outside in tangible and objective reality while introversion is focused inwards primarily,in how the external things affect the individual in several ways (in own feelings, inner world, sensations, etc).
About the LII question, I think is because the nature of elements, being Te bussiness or pragmatic logic, while Ti is system or structural logic, which is needed in maths. Actually most of the Ti dom I know are good in maths while Te are not very good at it and don't care about it because they don't see a practical daily use for it.
Last edited by Faith; 06-18-2018 at 12:14 AM.
Let's focus on Jung. See below.
External vs. internal is also problematic. For example, Ni provides internal (i.e. inner world) information. Te uses it and makes a judgement. (N.B. a judging function is "blind" ... it doesn't provide/produce any information). In what sense is Te about the outer world here?I think that extraversion is focused outside in tangible and objective reality while introversion is focused inwards primarily,in how the external things affect the individual in several ways (in own feelings, inner world, sensations, etc).
Yes, I agree with you ... Ti (or actually Ti-), structural logic, is the most important function in math... hence, mathematicians are usually LII. But Jung claims that any information in math textbooks is about Extroverted Thinking. That doesn't make any sense! Furthermore, if objective vs. subjective is true, then Te must include structural logic as well. But we don't see any obvious structural logic in LIE and LSE. We see organizational skills, but that is about efficiency (not categorization / classification).About the LII question, I think is because the nature of elements, being Te bussiness or pragmatic logic, while Ti is system or structural logic, which is needed in maths. Actually most of the Ti dom I know are good in maths while Te are not very good at it and don't care about it because they don't see a practical daily use for it.
Again, Jung: "The rationality of both types is orientated objectively, and depends upon objective data. Their reasonableness corresponds with what passes as reasonable from the collective standpoint."
its not, and this is why intro/extroversion in terms of distinction within the scheme (i.e.: attitude in general) and the actual phenonology as a product of their placement is what gives rise to "internal/external"--in short: an extroverted function in the creative position is "internal" as a matter of how it is experienced, which is why gulenko just makes Ti the the "creative" function for ILI. to reiterate internal/external is an emergent phenomenon of not just functional attitude but placement
Can you explain this part a bit further?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote