Carl Jung's Type Revealed

[Rocky]

but you get a pretty good picture of each type by reading the online descriptions.

No, you don't. Most are extremely stereotypical, only describe the most shallow of traits (which probably aren't even strongly type related), and in some cases, wholly mentally masturbated. Maybe the books you have read are better, but that's pretty much what is on online profiles.

[Rick]

Most socionists probably haven't made much of an investigation of Jung's type before typing him, and that's no advert for them.

A number of Russian socionists are quite knowledgeable about Jung and have read a lot about his life (I don't consider myself one of them).

[Phaedrus]

Most socionists probably haven't made much of an investigation of Jung's type before typing him, and that's no advert for them.

A number of Russian socionists are quite knowledgeable about Jung and have read a lot about his life (I don't consider myself one of them).

Okay. And what is their explanation for the fact that Jung -- according to them -- was wrong about his own type?

[Rick]

Most socionists probably haven't made much of an investigation of Jung's type before typing him, and that's no advert for them.

A number of Russian socionists are quite knowledgeable about Jung and have read a lot about his life (I don't consider myself one of them).

Okay. And what is their explanation for the fact that Jung -- according to them -- was wrong about his own type?

I don't know.

[FDG]

Most socionists probably haven't made much of an investigation of Jung's type before typing him, and that's no advert for them.

A number of Russian socionists are quite knowledgeable about Jung and have read a lot about his life (I don't consider myself one of them).

Okay. And what is their explanation for the fact that Jung -- according to them -- was wrong about his own type?

I don't know.

Maybe he was autistic.

[tcaudilllg]

There is a quote I came upon recently.

This sounds like hidden agenda.

A 'complete' life does not consist in a theoretical completeness, but in the fact that one accepts, without reservation, the particular fatal tissue in which one finds oneself embedded."

: observing the relationship between field in the context of an objective dynamic.

"the fact that one accepts, without reservation"
"the particular fatal tissue in which one finds oneself embedded."

[tcaudilllg]

Let's say you guys are right about Jung having INTj traits....

ENFp-XNXx (INTJ)?

That would allow him critical analysis of psychological matters, as opposed to moral analysis.

[Rocky]

Ah, yeah, so, where does the enfp part come in then? I don't buy this cross-type thing. He's more logical then moral, yet he's primary type is Feeling? Ehh...

[tcaudilllg]

Ah, yeah, so, where does the enfp part come in then? I don't buy this cross-type thing. He's more logical then moral, yet he's primary type is Feeling? Ehh...

Psychology. Looking at the logical foundations/structure of psychic activity. Most of it is personal knowledge + creative art.

[Phaedrus]

Filatova mentions Jung as a well-known example of an LII. So, at least one socionist thinks that he was LII.

But I still would like to know how representative her opinion is of the general view on Jung's type in the socionic community. How many socionists think that he was an LII? How many think that he was an ILI? And are there any other candidate types that has been proposed by Russian socionists? Does anyone know anything about that? Dmitri? Rick?

[Rocky]

Dmitri said he's ILI fwiw.

[Phaedrus]

Dmitri said he's ILI fwiw.

Yeah, I know. And I think that he has mistyped him. I had got the impression that the majority of socionists had typed Jung as an ILI, but maybe that is not true. Maybe most of them think that he was an LII, which would be fine with me.

[aestrivex]

this is only partially relevant because many accounts of jung's life are available, but the socionics community at large seems to have mistyped a fair number of people altogether (although the majority of them are probably westerners).

[Jarno]

i've read his book, psychological types, which was in a strange writing style.

So i would say he's not an INTP (ILI) but more probably an INTJ (LII)

I don't believe he was an ENFP. They are poor theorizers on average.

[DividedsGhost]

I've been reading a lot of Jung lately, and I can tell you so far that his theories on consciousness, personal unconscious, and collective unconsciousness (archetypes) are not taken lightly or for granted by him like Freud does with his own theories. He had an obsession and insatiable desire to understand humanity and studied many types of philosophical problems and religious ideas to explain his concepts with a very rigorous examination and thus logical proof that leaves no room for reasonable doubt.

That quote above is in fact the very essence of the problem of existence and one I came to also realize independently a little while ago before becoming interesested in understanding Jung's ideas more properly and without mental shortcut.

That said, we have (or perhaps had) a man whom manifested a high use of Ni, Ti, and some Ne. Being that Jung was obsessed and even originally inspired by mystical events to develop his theories and the very irrational nature that precludes in such an undertaking, I think he is either an LII with a strong demonstrative id or an IEI with an undeveloped id. Given that socionics seems to blatantly disobey the more basic rules of Jungs cognitive functions, mainly an element's introverted and extroverted representation being opposing, and showing no reasonable explanation for doing such a thing that I am aware of, I'm highly inclined to recant my previous typing of LII and see most evidence towards IEI. It even makes sense in the context of him saying he is an intuitive and a thinker, given the primary role of an IEI as Ni-Ti and its obsession with understanding, especially at the point of using mysticism as a precursory form of reaching that goal.

[EyeSeeCold]

The lucidness of The Red Book was kind of off putting, as I was thinking it'd be more introspective rather than highly detailed accounts of experiences which seemed more fabricated than real.

Before that I was thinking ILI, but now I'm in the mix between IEI, ILI and LII.

[Crispy]

There is video evidence of Jung typing himself NT somewhere around here. Most books/website materials have him as INTp, with INTj a far-behind 2nd place.

[Galen]

I'm not / and I reject the entire notion of 'society' as having any meaning. It's a metaphysical non-entity amounting to little more than a semantic spook I'd love to see cleaved from human worldviews. The sooner people stop thinking of 'society' and idealizing "what is best for society," the better off we'll all be.

What you're describing from Jung there likely has much more to do with his being So-last instinct.

for So last

[DividedsGhost]

Like I've told you before, / has nothing intrinsically to do with upholding so-called "society."

I'm not / and I reject the entire notion of 'society' as having any meaning. It's a metaphysical non-entity amounting to little more than a semantic spook I'd love to see cleaved from human worldviews. The sooner people stop thinking of 'society' and idealizing "what is best for society," the better off we'll all be.

What you're describing from Jung there likely has much more to do with his being So-last instinct.

Okay, but explain it then. I'm also making an effort to be wrong to learn, whereas you are not. If you call bullshit on being able to express an explanation of the idea, then your understanding is bullshit as well. So enlighten please.

[The Ineffable]

and it looks like Galen chimed in to say the same

Your personal puppy? Of course, but that's no supporting argument.

[Sol]

INTP

[noid]

I see it as INTp, but the fact is that he appear more INTj in his video...
Ive an other more delusionnal theorie for an INXj wich use Ni demonstrative in a autistic manner :
idk if this is possible, but he can be high at Ni and theorize information comin from his demonstrative and his sensory function... In a way theorize Ni coupled with Si information. This is somewhat supported by something he have said that I dont re-find, it was on an old post here, approx 10 pages, and really funny. I try to find this .

I somewhat agree on Ti, I can see Fi (admit that he have big inclination toward finding balance, finding way of see event of life and how we should "approach life" ect...), ive no hard time to see Ni and Ne.
Jung was a special type.