Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 56

Thread: Jung destroying the concept of duality

  1. #1
    Reyne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    TIM
    5w4 sp/so
    Posts
    371
    Mentioned
    103 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default Jung destroying the concept of duality

    "For instance, if you have to explain an introverted-intuitive husband to an extrovert wife, it is a most painstaking affair because, you see, an extrovert sensation type is furtherest away from the ‐ inner experience and the rational functions.
    He adapts and behaves according to the facts as they are, and he is always caught by those facts.
    He himself is those facts.
    But if the introvert is intuitive, to him that is hell, because as soon as he is in a definite situation, he tries to find a hole where he can get out.
    To him, every given situation is just the worst that can happen to him.

    He is pinched and feels he is caught, suffocated, chained.
    He must break those fetters, because he is the man who will discover a new field. He will plant that field, and as soon as the new plants are coming up, he’s done; he’s over and no more interested.
    Others will reap what he has sown.
    When those two marry, the extrovert-sensation and the introvert-intuitive, there is trouble, I can assure you."


    Conversations with Carl Jung

  2. #2
    Jesus is the cruel sausage consentingadult's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    3,670
    Mentioned
    103 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jung might have been right in establishing the facts, but wrong in establishing the value judgments. E.g. take the stress of a the relationship between an SLE and and IEI: if we project the one-dimensional generally accepted social constructs about what a good relationship is about, then certainly SLE-IEI duality is a dysfunctional type of relationship. But if we let go of preconceived ideas of what entails a good relationship, we can see merit in a relationship such as those between SLEs and IEIs.

    I'm very much afraid Jung hadn't detached himself enough from generally accepted constructs of his days.

    “I have never tried that before, so I think I should definitely be able to do that.” --- Pippi Longstocking

  3. #3
    Rebelondeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    1,509
    Mentioned
    128 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Personal baggage including lack of maturity, biological imperatives/differences, and mental health issues (in that order) prevent or kill relationships; Jung is a very minor player because all types can easily coexist under ideal circumstances. When one closely oversees a lot of people, this becomes self-evident.

    a.k.a. I/O

  4. #4
    shotgunfingers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    (ง •̀_•́)ง
    TIM
    Se-LSI- Harmonizing
    Posts
    1,249
    Mentioned
    101 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    idk as of yet. The person I got along best with and still do imo was a IEI.. because special snowflake a the time (theater, weeb, arts, weird goth-ish bookworm).. but now she refers to herself as a "raidboss monster who eats snowflakes for breakfast" .. she runs a bookstore e_e and man you don't want to get on her bad side (well I can, cus I'm speshul). She seems to be suffering trying to use that much Se tho..

    Other closer interaction with supposed EIEs (wo are not on this forum) has been.. a mixed bag tbh.
    Last edited by shotgunfingers; 10-05-2020 at 12:31 PM.

  5. #5

    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    TIM
    INTp (Te)
    Posts
    599
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sadly, I don't think there is more on this.

    I also don't think Jung was right there.

  6. #6
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    2,734
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Reyne, nice find! Is this from the conversations with Jung that are on youtube? Do you have the link to where he says this?

    What do you make of this quote from Marie-Louise von Franz? She is obviously describing duality / semi-duality.

    In marriage, as Jung points out, one tends to marry the opposite type. And then again he is, or so he thinks for the moment, freed from the disagreeable task of confronting his inferior function. That is one of the greatest blessings and sources of happiness in the early stages of marriage; suddenly the whole weight of the inferior function is gone, one lives in a blessed oneness with the other, and every problem is solved. But if one of the partners dies, or the need comes up in one of them to develop the inferior function instead of just leaving those section of life to the other, the trouble starts.

    Lectures on Jung's typology (von Franz, Hillman)
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)


    My Pinterest

  7. #7
    Dating my conflictors Megatrop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Brazil
    TIM
    Fi-IEE 4w5/6w7 Sx/So
    Posts
    366
    Mentioned
    26 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's impossible to destroy the concept of duality. Duality is everywhere.
    I like to teach others, even though I consider myself to be the most ignorant person alive.
    So if I impose my opinions on you, don't take them as arrogance. It's just that I have a strong willingness to share knowledge.

    The more we focus on something, the clearer it gets, but all the rest of the universe gets blurrier. This applies to our thoughts, emotions, feelings, senses, etc. A great part of living can be summarized as the development of the ability to switch our attention to different aspects of our reality in order to achieve that which we want to see as a completely new kind of reality.

  8. #8
    xerxe xerxe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Ministry of Love
    Posts
    6,556
    Mentioned
    121 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reyne View Post
    "For instance, if you have to explain an introverted-intuitive husband to an extrovert wife, it is a most painstaking affair because, you see, an extrovert sensation type is furtherest away from the ‐ inner experience and the rational functions.
    He adapts and behaves according to the facts as they are, and he is always caught by those facts.
    He himself is those facts.
    But if the introvert is intuitive, to him that is hell, because as soon as he is in a definite situation, he tries to find a hole where he can get out.
    To him, every given situation is just the worst that can happen to him.

    He is pinched and feels he is caught, suffocated, chained.
    He must break those fetters, because he is the man who will discover a new field. He will plant that field, and as soon as the new plants are coming up, he’s done; he’s over and no more interested.
    Others will reap what he has sown.
    When those two marry, the extrovert-sensation and the introvert-intuitive, there is trouble, I can assure you."


    Conversations with Carl Jung
    Augusta applied Jungian typology to understand the relationships that occurred in Soviet collective housing, where multiple families (and contrasting personalities) would be bunched up and forced to live closely together. She noticed that relationships involving opposing dichotomies either went very smoothly, or devolved into misunderstandings and mutual embarrassment. She called the former 'duals' and the latter 'conflictors'. She noticed that that the p/j dichotomy acted as the switch that inverted the entire character of the relationship—e.g. ENTp dualizes with ISFp but conflicts with ISFj, as you're probably already aware.


    Augusta didn't copy Jung, as many love to emphasize. She used his input and the input of other psychologists (like Kępiński) to create something entirely new, which knowingly and statedly contradicts Jung on many points.

  9. #9
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,547
    Mentioned
    231 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Trouble ist what both types are looking for in a relationship.

    I would also Like to See the original Version, which Word has been translated into 'trouble' from German...
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12,179
    Mentioned
    1114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    He mistaked. Dealing with individual therapy he had the lack of experiece of watching how people of different types influence on each other. In the theoretizing there, he followed to idea that the difference in types is worse than similarity for having good relations because it's hard to understand differing people. He missed that the difference also allows supplementing and such the basis for useful exchange, - the basis for good relations.
    In the beginning different types _may_ have more troubles than similar types. But they may adopt, study to deal with each other as have the attraction of mutual supporting abbility in them, what is expressed in irrational sympathy. Due to the difference they may give more to each other - the info and help where other one is weak. The positive relations development needs to have the functions as supplementing by values - as in duality, and not opposing as in superego. Also it needs to be open to other one to accept his views, emotions and thoughts - to process that and absord to enrich your personality. It's useful to have attitudes of friendship and love to get the use from good IR, to reduce the interpersonal border between people, to join their minds in one - this helps to get the best information exchange.

    Jung was too catched by individualistic philosophy. So missed the possibility for more useful cooperation which have people with more differing psyche. He even had the negative about such influences due to difficulties to accept the idead of useful cooperation, - because of his individualistic attitude. This can be supposed as his students thought that differing by types people predispose the opponents to stay more undeveloped in weak regions. That people get a use from such support was hard to accept for him. That differing people which are in friendship relations may help to become each other better as tend to copy each other, stimulate the attention on weak regions what helps to improve them, what makes weak regions more consciousness and allows to use more of energy which was supressed to the unconsciousness, to reduce neurotic factor of such energy suppressed in the unconsciousness.
    Jung needed more experience of watching relations between people with different types. To notice IR theory elements and positive factors between duality types. Following to individualistic approach he missed and underesteemated the use of cooperation between people, what leaded him to mistake as noticed only troubles in differences.

    May sometimes experiments will proof that duality pairs are better than identities by emotional states people have there, by % of breaks. Also can be proved the existence of higher sympathy between some types, better emotional states during and after such communications.
    The objective practice will show who is correct. Not theories.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  11. #11
    Humanist Beautiful sky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    EII land
    TIM
    EII INFj
    Posts
    25,408
    Mentioned
    631 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)

    Default

    lol
    Idk as long as I am dishing out a lot of love and affection to my husband (LSE) he doesn’t care what I believe in and always is on my side and has my back!
    -
    Dual type (as per tcaudilllg)
    Enneagram 2w1sw(1w9) helps others to live up to their own standards of what a good person is and is very behind the scenes in the process.
    Tritype 1-2-6 stacking sp/sx


    I'm constantly looking to align the real with the ideal.I've been more oriented toward being overly idealistic by expecting the real to match the ideal. My thinking side is dominent. The result is that sometimes I can be overly impersonal or self-centered in my approach, not being understanding of others in the process and simply thinking "you should do this" or "everyone should follor this rule"..."regardless of how they feel or where they're coming from"which just isn't a good attitude to have. It is a way, though, to give oneself an artificial sense of self-justification. LSE

    Best description of functions:
    http://socionicsstudy.blogspot.com/2...functions.html

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12,179
    Mentioned
    1114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    And one more moment...
    Jung thought his type as LII, while having ILI.
    So people which he supposed as having leading function same as his suggestive one were base Fe - his conflictors and revisors! His personal experience could influence in his bad opinion too.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  13. #13

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    MI
    TIM
    IEI-Ni
    Posts
    11,268
    Mentioned
    326 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Duality is a perfect heterosexual construct. When it works appropriately 'as it's supposed to', it is the thing that continues the human race in the most socially appropriate way. (perfect heterosexuality) Duality itself is based on this perfect heterosexuality. I, myself, am a by-product of this perfect heterosexuality. But in life- as they say 'shit happens', and things often don't work the way they are supposed to, right.

    What heterosexist academia socionists forgot to mention (and what people forget until RuPaul dresses in drag at them) while discovering duality is that in order to work properly, the people also have to be "healthy" themselves and truly like themselves first. (which is where people FAIL and they fail HARD and deserve an Acme Anvil to fall upon them.)

    A lot of duality is but a Dark, defunctionary Duality where its an obviously Unhealthy Introvert attracted to an Unhealthy Narcissist Extrovert. Instead of a self confident introvert who truly loves themselves, attracted to a grounded extrovert who also truly loves themselves (rather than their own image or projection) and vice-versa.

    In other words duality only ironically works out for you as to how non-dualistic you are with the Gay Shaman Gods. Duality is needed to make the human race 'a thing' but Non-duality is the true nature of this universe.

    If you don't love yourself, how the hell are you going to love anybody else? Can I get a Gay-Men? As ideal and life creating as heterosexuality truly is, even that will fail miserably under psychological disorders. I got annoyed before when people told me to love myself because it seemed narcissistic but it really is very good advice and I realize I too wasn't doing it and I was being an Unhealthy Introvert attracted to Unhealthy Extroverts and falling in love with 'their image' and 'not them.' In the most failed fucked up relationships of my IEI str8 female friends- they obviously were NOT starting at a place of Self-Love until I bitch slapped some of them. No matter how it seems like it would fit in a picture-perfect storybook way- a person's own [lack of] self-worth will destroy the concept of duality.

    Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with being attracted to somebody stronger or more outgoing than you are or whatever- but if you don't like yourself then it's all going to go to shit anyway.

    Maybe in a fucked up way, fucked up people make us love ourselves more because we know they are fucked up too and 'can't judge us' but I still believe and know the more you truly like yourself- the more your partner will too, and probably everybody else. And it can be genuine and rich, instead of a cheap half-joke. It is not the same as narcissists, who actually hate and loathe themselves.
    Last edited by BandD; 10-06-2020 at 02:07 AM.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Posts
    481
    Mentioned
    16 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BandD View Post
    Duality is a perfect heterosexual construct. When it works appropriately 'as it's supposed to', it is the thing that continues the human race in the most socially appropriate way. (perfect heterosexuality) Duality itself is based on this perfect heterosexuality. I, myself, am a by-product of this perfect heterosexuality. But in life- as they say 'shit happens', and things often don't work the way they are supposed to, right.

    What heterosexist academia socionists forgot to mention (and what people forget until RuPaul dresses in drag at them) while discovering duality is that in order to work properly, the people also have to be "healthy" themselves and truly like themselves first. (which is where people FAIL and they fail HARD and deserve an Acme Anvil to fall upon them.)

    A lot of duality is but a Dark, defunctionary Duality where its an obviously Unhealthy Introvert attracted to an Unhealthy Narcissist Extrovert. Instead of a self confident introvert who truly loves themselves, attracted to a grounded extrovert who also truly loves themselves (rather than their own image or projection) and vice-versa.

    In other words duality only ironically works out for you as to how non-dualistic you are with the Gay Shaman Gods. Duality is needed to make the human race 'a thing' but Non-duality is the true nature of this universe.

    If you don't love yourself, how the hell are you going to love anybody else? Can I get a Gay-Men? As ideal and life creating as heterosexuality truly is, even that will fail miserably under psychological disorders. I got annoyed before when people told me to love myself because it seemed narcissistic but it really is very good advice and I realize I too wasn't doing it and I was being an Unhealthy Introvert attracted to Unhealthy Extroverts and falling in love with 'their image' and 'not them.' In the most failed fucked up relationships of my IEI str8 female friends- they obviously were NOT starting at a place of Self-Love until I bitch slapped some of them. No matter how it seems like it would fit in a picture-perfect storybook way- a person's own [lack of] self-worth will destroy the concept of duality.

    Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with being attracted to somebody stronger or more outgoing than you are or whatever- but if you don't like yourself then it's all going to go to shit anyway.

    Maybe in a fucked up way, fucked up people make us love ourselves more because we know they are fucked up too and 'can't judge us' but I still believe and know the more you truly like yourself- the more your partner will too, and probably everybody else. And it can be genuine and rich, instead of a cheap half-joke. It is not the same as narcissists, who actually hate and loathe themselves.
    How does duality work or differ in the nonhetero communities? I was just curious because you made the distinction.

  15. #15

    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Posts
    56
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by consentingadult View Post
    Jung might have been right in establishing the facts, but wrong in establishing the value judgments. E.g. take the stress of a the relationship between an SLE and and IEI: if we project the one-dimensional generally accepted social constructs about what a good relationship is about, then certainly SLE-IEI duality is a dysfunctional type of relationship. But if we let go of preconceived ideas of what entails a good relationship, we can see merit in a relationship such as those between SLEs and IEIs.

    I'm very much afraid Jung hadn't detached himself enough from generally accepted constructs of his days.

    Man, when SLE love you, they REALLY, REALLY love you.


  16. #16

    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    TIM
    INTp (Te)
    Posts
    599
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    And one more moment...
    Jung thought his type as LII, while having ILI.
    So people which he supposed as having leading function same as his suggestive one were base Fe - his conflictors and revisors! His personal experience could influence in his bad opinion too.
    That could be a reason. Even if Jung somehow wasn't ILI (I personally don't know enough about him to type beyond 'probably LII/IXI, more probably IXI'), he still could have seen his conflictors as what we know today as duals and based his experiences on that.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    12,179
    Mentioned
    1114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Duschia View Post
    I personally don't know enough about him to type beyond 'probably LII/IXI
    There is enough to type with assurance between ILI / LII.
    LII have texts with good structure. Jung's texts is a mess. What is seen in Psychological types, where among much of water with switching to different abstract themes sometimes is met important and clear about types. It's possibly even to remove chapters 1-9 - we'll be lost not much, while that is the majority of the book's text.
    His autobiography "Memories, dreams, reflections" to understand his type. He much lived in Ni dreaming and esoterics than in clear Ti logic. Compare the style of Jung's texts with texts for example of Gulenko (possible LII).
    Also there are videos for VI.
    Types examples: video bloggers, actors

  18. #18
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    North Italy
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    16,547
    Mentioned
    231 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sol View Post
    There is enough to type with assurance between ILI / LII.
    LII have texts with good structure. Jung's texts is a mess. What is seen in Psychological types, where among much of water with switching to different abstract themes sometimes is met important and clear about types. It's possibly even to remove chapters 1-9 - we'll be lost not much, while that is the majority of the book's text.
    His autobiography "Memories, dreams, reflections" to understand his type. He much lived in Ni dreaming and esoterics than in clear Ti logic. Compare the style of Jung's texts with texts for example of Gulenko (possible LII).
    Also there are videos for VI.
    I agree completely
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  19. #19
    Kalinoche buenasnoches's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    currently belgium
    TIM
    ESE
    Posts
    3,497
    Mentioned
    210 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ''if you have to explain an introverted-intuitive husband to an extrovert wife is a ***most*** painstaking affair''

    convincing can be painstaking because you have an agenda and a kind of preconceived idea of how the exchange should unfold (esp if one is neurotic). in this sense, convincing may differ from explaining.

    - why should a rational extrovert have a harder time understanding the introverted intuition than the other way around?
    - I think that Carl did a great job describing the thing. he should be more confident. maybe he tried to get a patient to understand introverted intuition and they were not open to it. he was kinda looking for people caught up in their own stuff anyway (that could be Freud though.)
    Last edited by Kalinoche buenasnoches; 10-06-2020 at 08:17 PM.
    thework.com // non-duality (advaita)

  20. #20

    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    859
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jung's gotta be ILI over LII because he took tons of different people and behaviors and created singular archetypes out of them (Ni).

  21. #21
    Ania's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    EII 4(w5)96 sx/so
    Posts
    232
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Having watched his interview on YouTube I think he’s attracted to Se instead of being put off by it and pretty unflinchingly narrates his sudden anger outburst where he dragged a bully(?)/peer around ok the floor/road out of anger. I forget the exact details. 9w8 maybe. Also yes the Ni is obvious s

  22. #22
    silke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    5,031
    Mentioned
    444 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reyne View Post
    Jung destroying the concept of duality
    He's not destroying it, as per the YouTube video titles - he's reinforcing it. Duality is both the union and the conflict of the opposites.

    Somehow you guys wishing duality to be a rose garden are missing the conflict of the opposites part.

  23. #23
    a two horned unicorn renegade Homicidal Maniac 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    sniffing your butt
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF 7 so/sx
    Posts
    5,617
    Mentioned
    249 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    You love to hate it and hate to love it. Apparently.

    Jung even described duality in someways.
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

  24. #24
    The CEO of Bigotry DivineStrength's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    (Ne)-ILE 5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reyne View Post
    But if the introvert is intuitive, to him that is hell, because as soon as he is in a definite situation, he tries to find a hole where he can get out.<br>
    To him, every given situation is just the worst that can happen to him.
    He is pinched and feels he is caught, suffocated, chained.
    He must break those fetters, because he is the man who will discover a new field. He will plant that field, and as soon as the new plants are coming up, he’s done; he’s over and no more interested.
    Others will reap what he has sown.
    The first part sounds like opposition to Se, the second part sounds like the actions of Ne.
    But extroverted Intuition is an oxymoron anyway, as is introverted sensing.
    Sensing is the intake and storage of plain physical information, Intuition is finding patterns in the stored data and doing "leaps" transcending logic.
    Sensing is minimal information metabolism, Intuition is maximum (unrestricted) information metabolism.
    Ethics is specialized Sensing, Logic is restricted Intuition
    Last edited by DivineStrength; 10-07-2020 at 07:26 AM.

  25. #25
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    2,734
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DivineStrength View Post
    But extroverted Intuition is an oxymoron anyway, as is introverted sensing.
    Sensing is the intake and storage of plain physical information, Intuition is finding patterns in the stored data and doing "leaps" transcending logic.
    Sensing is minimal information metabolism, Intuition is maximum (unrestricted) information metabolism.
    Ethics is specialized Sensing, Logic is restricted Intuition
    "plain physical information" is more like the raw material for the sensing function. Si processes this and focuses on the introverted component, the inner impression. If Si is developed then the result can be something very far from the "plain physical information".
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)


    My Pinterest

  26. #26
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Maizistan
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Reyne View Post
    "For instance, if you have to explain an introverted-intuitive husband to an extrovert wife, it is a most painstaking affair because, you see, an extrovert sensation type is furtherest away from the ‐ inner experience and the rational functions.
    He adapts and behaves according to the facts as they are, and he is always caught by those facts.
    He himself is those facts.
    But if the introvert is intuitive, to him that is hell, because as soon as he is in a definite situation, he tries to find a hole where he can get out.
    To him, every given situation is just the worst that can happen to him.

    He is pinched and feels he is caught, suffocated, chained.
    He must break those fetters, because he is the man who will discover a new field. He will plant that field, and as soon as the new plants are coming up, he’s done; he’s over and no more interested.
    Others will reap what he has sown.
    When those two marry, the extrovert-sensation and the introvert-intuitive, there is trouble, I can assure you."


    Conversations with Carl Jung
    I think I relate to this view. I'd also be interested to know where this comes from, because I'm curious whether he saw a problem existing between opposite functions in general, or only specifically between intuition and sensing.

    If the latter, perhaps semiduality would be preferable for rational types, and maybe illusory or comparative relations for irrationals? Interesting to consider.

  27. #27
    The CEO of Bigotry DivineStrength's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    Germany
    TIM
    (Ne)-ILE 5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    9
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Tallmo
    Si is mostly body sensation, right? Especially health (avoiding Illness), but also pleasure. Secondarily it can also mean decorations, artsy stuff and clothes. Physical harmony
    All pretty direct physical stuff.
    But you are right, Se is a more pure form of Sensing, whereas Si intersects with the Ethical realm, and Fe in turn with the Sensorical realm.
    If you ask "How do you feel?" you can expect both Si and Fe realm information. When you comfort someone, it can be Fe as well as Si.
    If you judge if something looks good or harmonious, you really process a minimum of information, very little is abstracted.
    In ethics, a little more is abstracted. From subtle body movements, mimic etc, the intentions and basic thought styles (emotional states) the person resides in are abstracted by guessing, and are manipulated by emitting these subtle cues yourself.

  28. #28
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    2,734
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DivineStrength View Post
    @Tallmo
    Si is mostly body sensation, right? Especially health (avoiding Illness), but also pleasure. Secondarily it can also mean decorations, artsy stuff and clothes. Physical harmony
    All pretty direct physical stuff.
    The problem here is that the socionics community uses inexact language and examples to try to refer to Si. It's not wrong per se, it's just that they are more like hinting at Si from the outside, than actually identifying it.

    You can use these hints to learn about Si, but only by also spending time with Si types (SEI, SLI). The hints should not be interpreted as definitions.

    Si is not identical to decorations, artsy stuff or clothes. Decorations etc. can evoke inner impressions, and that's why Si people like to get involved with these. Si in itself can be far removed from these outer objects.

    If Si is described only by the inner experience it really is, it gets pretty hard to understand. Jung gave it a good try, but he also got misunderstood a lot. But the "body sensations" part is easier, like the "fluctuating organic reactions" or something like that. Marie-Louise von Franz also has a nice description, saying that Si is experienced like a stone falling into deep water. Meaning something like the objective world of sensations is colored by the psyche, not experienced in its objective form.

    But you are right, Se is a more pure form of Sensing, whereas Si intersects with the Ethical realm, and Fe in turn with the Sensorical realm.
    If you ask "How do you feel?" you can expect both Si and Fe realm information. When you comfort someone, it can be Fe as well as Si.
    If you judge if something looks good or harmonious, you really process a minimum of information, very little is abstracted.
    In ethics, a little more is abstracted. From subtle body movements, mimic etc, the intentions and basic thought styles (emotional states) the person resides in are abstracted by guessing, and are manipulated by emitting these subtle cues yourself.
    I'm not really sure what approach you have here. The functions are very specific information processing units in the psyche. They are difficult to learn to observe, and one has to spend a lot of time with very different people in different situations to learn them. Reading about the functions is definitely not enough. Many things we do, like comforting someone etc. can mean many things and can be related to different functions depending on the person and the situation.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)


    My Pinterest

  29. #29
    FreelancePoliceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Maizistan
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    1,378
    Mentioned
    123 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    @Tallmo, would you say that much of the difficulty understanding Si has to do with Si being difficult to describe by nature? Of course you can say that "Si is perception of internal impressions" or something to that effect, but that's difficult to explain to someone -- what are these inner impressions like? How is it distinct from feeling? How is it distinct from even Se (since perceptive functions aren't purely perceptive, after all)? Jung struggled to explain these well (I didn't find what he wrote about them to be very helpful, at least), and I've never seen anyone explain them any better. And because Si isn't in my ego block I don't have a great subjective understanding of it myself, so I also struggle. But even Si bases don't seem particularly able to describe Si, either.

  30. #30
    Queen of the Damned Aylen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Spiritus Mundi
    TIM
    psyche 4w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    11,325
    Mentioned
    975 Post(s)
    Tagged
    42 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raTG13 View Post
    Man, when SLE love you, they REALLY, REALLY love you.


    “My typology is . . . not in any sense to stick labels on people at first sight. It is not a physiognomy and not an anthropological system, but a critical psychology dealing with the organization and delimitation of psychic processes that can be shown to be typical.”​ —C.G. Jung

     



  31. #31

    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    TIM
    INTp (Te)
    Posts
    599
    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Pixel View Post
    Jung's gotta be ILI over LII because he took tons of different people and behaviors and created singular archetypes out of them (Ni).
    And they work.

  32. #32
    a two horned unicorn renegade Homicidal Maniac 007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    sniffing your butt
    TIM
    ILE-H LEVF 7 so/sx
    Posts
    5,617
    Mentioned
    249 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Duschia View Post
    And they work.

    Hence LII
    Measuring you right now

    Winning is for losers

     

    Sincerely yours,
    idiosyncratic type

  33. #33
    Cryogenic Sleep: Goodbye! Tommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    TIM
    SLI-0 D sx/sp
    Posts
    3,147
    Mentioned
    371 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stance View Post
    How does duality work or differ in the nonhetero communities? I was just curious because you made the distinction.
    they get attracted to their identical.

  34. #34
    What's the purpose of SEI? Tallmo's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Finland
    TIM
    SEI
    Posts
    2,734
    Mentioned
    203 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FreelancePoliceman View Post
    @Tallmo, would you say that much of the difficulty understanding Si has to do with Si being difficult to describe by nature?
    difficult by nature, and also because it's hidden. But I guess that's true for all introverted functions also. I don't claim to understand Ni very well, although I can identify it in people.

    Of course you can say that "Si is perception of internal impressions" or something to that effect, but that's difficult to explain to someone -- what are these inner impressions like?
    Jung does a good job of describing it. But when describing inner phenomena one has to use some metaphors maybe, like he does.

    How is it distinct from feeling?
    I don't understand the connection to feeling, since feeling is rational, about attitude. Si can perceive nervous reactions, but that's not feeling as a function.

    How is it distinct from even Se (since perceptive functions aren't purely perceptive, after all)?
    That's pretty easy to observe though. Se goes by the outer impact / connection to physical reality. Si goes by the inner impression to outer reality. Making it sometimes totally irrelevant to the outer situation. Like observing everything through a screen. One can sometimes feel this strongly when walking into a bar full of people. Si is distant from all this, taking it in as an impression, but Se is out there talking to the ladies.

    And because Si isn't in my ego block I don't have a great subjective understanding of it myself, so I also struggle.
    I think LIIs can have a pretty good connection to Si. If they just become aware of it.

    But even Si bases don't seem particularly able to describe Si, either.
    They have nothing to compare it with. It's hard to even be aware of something you are swimming around in.

    EDIT: sorry, off-topic
    Last edited by Tallmo; 10-08-2020 at 09:35 AM.
    A true sense-perception certainly exists, but it always looks as though objects were not so much forcing their way into the subject in their own right as that the subject were seeing things quite differently, or saw quite other things than the rest of mankind. As a matter of fact, the subject perceives the same things as everybody else, only, he never stops at the purely objective effect, but concerns himself with the subjective perception released by the objective stimulus.
    (Jung on Si)


    My Pinterest

  35. #35

    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    859
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tallmo View Post
    difficult by nature, and also because it's hidden. But I guess that's true for all introverted functions also. I don't claim to understand Ni very well, although I can identify it in people.



    Jung does a good job of describing it. But when describing inner phenomena one has to use some metaphors maybe, like he does.



    I don't understand the connection to feeling, since feeling is rational, about attitude. Si can perceive nervous reactions, but that's not feeling as a function.



    That's pretty easy to observe though. Se goes by the outer impact / connection to physical reality. Si goes by the inner impression to outer reality. Making it sometimes totally irrelevant to the outer situation. Like observing everything through a screen. One can sometimes feel this strongly when walking into a bar full of people. Si is distant from all this, taking it in as an impression, but Se is out there talking to the ladies.



    I think LIIs can have a pretty good connection to Si. If they just become aware of it.



    They have nothing to compare it with. It's hard to even be aware of something you are swimming around in.

    EDIT: sorry, off-topic
    Se: when you touch something soft you feel the sensation of the soft thing.

    Si: when you touch something soft, you feel the sensation of your finger touching the soft thing and the soft thing kinda feels like this other silk thing you touched once before.

    Is how I understand it.

  36. #36

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE-Ti-N
    Posts
    401
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rebelondeck View Post
    Personal baggage including lack of maturity, biological imperatives/differences, and mental health issues (in that order) prevent or kill relationships; Jung is a very minor player because all types can easily coexist under ideal circumstances. When one closely oversees a lot of people, this becomes self-evident.
    Strongly agreed.

  37. #37

    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    TIM
    SLE-Ti-N
    Posts
    401
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Pixel View Post
    Se: when you touch something soft you feel the sensation of the soft thing.

    Si: when you touch something soft, you feel the sensation of your finger touching the soft thing and the soft thing kinda feels like this other silk thing you touched once before.

    Is how I understand it.
    I don't really separate the two tbh. I feel like it's both an in-the-moment distinct & discrete sensation (your Se def), and I both recognise it as fitting some familiar template (your Si def). Because the latter orients the distinct sensation, but for that I don't have to focus too much on how it feels like the other thing I touched before. I just kinda "know" it and that's that

    I saw an SLE's post somewhere on here on how she also focuses on sensory associations that were exactly like what you've called Si here.

  38. #38
    Aramas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    United States
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    1,902
    Mentioned
    114 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Maybe he confused duality and semi duality lol

  39. #39
    Nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Posts
    139
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Forever Jung
    ~Fish heads, fish heads, rolli polli fish heads~
    ~Fish heads, fish heads, eat them up, yum!~

  40. #40
    Aaron Something's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Hell, Argentina.
    TIM
    IEE-Ne 7w8 Sx/Sp
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    28 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'll destroy u all with @Northstar's monster cock
    I fuck whoever makes me hard

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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