Augusta's Commentary on Jung's typology

[Exodus]

Translation:

https://translate.google.com/transla...t.html&prev=_t

Original link:

http://www.socioniko.net/ru/articles/aug-comment.html

This article deserves to be better known. Augusta comments directly on the similarities and differences between socionics and Jung's typology. The similarities she identifies are more on the side of overall structure, e.g. that you can't be "completely introverted" all the time, certain functions may predominate but their opposites are never wholly absent.

And she identifies some differences between the two: "Jung's erroneous hypotheses". One is that he didn't distinguish between (the attitude of) the leading function and the type itself. This is a big conceptual leap that Augusta made with socionics.

Another is the semantics: "The author of the typology was mistaken when he tried to establish what exactly constitutes the specific content of "mental functions", which we called the IM elements."

This is just one sentence in the article, but it conceals a very vast difference in semantics. Probably the differences are so great that Augusta didn't want to delve into them. In practice this is why Jung's typology is incommensurable with socionics.