Originally Posted by
CR400AF
The definitions are changed such that IMO Model A has better names and definitions.
For instance Model G switches the names of Creative and Demonstrative, this brings a lot of problems. For instance, LIIs often has a defocused look. In Model G, it's explained by Demonstrative Ne. Hence Model G must define Ne as "from unconscious" while defining Ni as "from the outside" to explain why Demonstrative Ne is more defocused than Demonstrative Ni. But this contradicts fundamental definitions of introversion/extraversion.
Also, IMO the Creative always has the opposite attitude than the Leading function. For instance Jung has Ne instead of Ni as his Creative. In Model G, IMO, quasi-identity pairs becomes the "mirror". For instance, according to Model G, LII creates with Ni under the leading of Ti, while ILI creates with Ti under the leading of Ni. This makes LII and ILI to be more mirror-wise theoretically while both of them being introverts. So as far as I'm concerned, in Model G it's more likely to mistype people into the opposite quadra.
To me the Demonstrative function (Model A) is a problem regardless, because it rises the question of function differentiation. Furthermore when you switch Demonstrative and Creative like in Model G then you have a configuration that clearly contradicts Jung conception of psychotypes.
In Model A the demonstrative kinda pass the Jung test (bu not really) because of its position in the vital ring i.e. not totally conscious (let's put it that way). However, if we talk about the same function in Model G then we have a problem for several reasons :
1) there are no "unconscious" functions in Model G. The model is primarily "behavior" oriented (empirical manifestation of the functions).
2) if the Demonstrative function (Creative in Model G) is as psycho-energetically strong as the leading function it is only theoretically by means of deduction in the typing process.
3) One of the main ways of differentiation is by function signs, the leading and Creative (Demonstrative in Model A) have different charges but the Leading and the demonstrative have the same charge. By establishing such rule you can deduce the sign of the three function by determining the charge of either one.
4) There is the issue of internalities/ externalities. If a leading function can be turned on or off in favor of the demonstrative (Creative in Model A) of opposite vertness and rational/Irrational dichotomy then that contradicts Jung too esp when those functions are equally strong. [Edit : plus Model G contradicts Model A because in the latter the creative is supposed to be what we bring to the world (let's pretend that we are supposed to bring something to the world lol !) whereas is Model G that function is part of the internalities functions i.e. directed at the private sphere not at society.]
For instance an LII behaving like an IEE at close psychological distance might be true from an empirical point of view, but it contradicts Jung since that would render a psychotype capable of switching the orientation of consciousness at will depending on the psychological distance (which btw is not really defined and seems subjective and arbitrary). Not to mention the systematization of this logic to all sociotypes . We could make a correlation with the Jungian persona but that would not hold against proper and rigorous scrutiny.
Originally Posted by Carl Jung
"To recapitulate for the sake of clarity: the products of all functions can be conscious, but
we speak of the “consciousness” of a function only when its use is under the control of the will and, at the same time, its governing principle is the decisive one
for the orientation of consciousness. This is true when, for instance, thinking is not a mere afterthought, or rumination, and when its conclusions possess an absolute validity, so that the logical result holds good both as a motive and as a guarantee of practical action without the backing of any further evidence.
This absolute sovereignty always belongs, empirically, to one function alone, and
can belong only to one function, because the equally independent intervention of another function would necessarily produce a different orientation which, partially at least, would contradict the first. But since it is a vital condition for the conscious process of adaptation always to have clear and unambiguous aims, the presence of a second function of equal power is naturally ruled out. This other function, therefore, can have only a secondary importance, as has been found to be the case in practice.
Its secondary importance is due to the fact that it is not, like the primary function, valid in its own right as an absolutely reliable and decisive factor, but comes into play more as an auxiliary or complementary function."
PT
Edit : re-framing, writing words that I forgot and adding an observation. It's still not clean and kinda messy though !
Model G IM roles
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote