I am going to post what I’d written to someone, the vision I’m referring to, before I even had my mega realizations with self-healing and had planned post about here, @WVBRY:
But it’s very interesting how almost all his definitions of the model overlap scs ego placements and equivalencies, other than a few things he took further to pathologize.
I have the opinion it’s highly compatible with scs.. from what I’ve intuited about scs, haven’t studied it much, filled in things..
And would even expand scs.. like, for instance, his work being better to approach in questionnaires for a very, very unhealthy person.. or considering the health level. Maybe there would be indicators for healthy use or not.
And vice versa, believe scs would do better in healthy use for things like the ignoring. So I believe they both cover blind posts, if you will.
Almost as if like.. trauma stores in that unconscious gateway… and then if it opens and floods, it gets neurotic. But with the gate closed, it can approach and just lend some unconscious means that may aspire towards better.. There is nothing obscuring a bias.
I believe the ignoring is a gateway to the unconscious.. and that this in trauma, complex trauma especially, will harbor a lot.
And I believe Beebe found out how that works.
I just perceive a lot of potentials for them to highly compliment, and I can’t help but want share this, because I believe this would make jungian functions highly transformative and result in a more ideal world and even have a lot of clinical potentials and to undo bias and neurosis…
Because.. They literally all at least in what I’ve intuited from it, as I’ve this tendency to just fill things in and not actually read it all.. Mean the equivalent things in their placements and even in some of the direct interactions
And so if they all are looking at things from the same placements, now it’s just a matter of a few differences in opinion, and also a varied focus on health and potentiality in how certain placements may manifest in the psyche, relative to health, relative to other factors..
Is also very interesting for two ILE’s to have come to these formations of a system…
Aushura had missing gaps in her model, and scs tries fill them in.. well, I believe one thing to fill in would be potentialities of certain function placements.
How I perceive typology, is that peoples’ biases and own function elements and their placements can hinder how a system is defined. Often, this will take people of various elementals overtime, to contribute “parts” to the whole, and one day, typology will be a model that is set into place… With the right parts and all..
This is true for anything, of course, not even merely typology.
I mean, the parts that are contributed, you interweave together to complete the whole.. this is how life works in my view, as much as I wouldn’t want it to, as with myself, I want be completely original.. enneagrammatic biases and coping, that I am@working to evolve past..
You have all these different models and definitions, to begin with, I feel, because if people focusing on different elements in respect to Jung’s original work. Some of these things perfected.. And can add on, now, others are made from myopic access of one’s inner faculty… Some of it may not even be clouded by function, but by enenagrammatic bias, or psychiatric disorders or traumatization…
Now, it’s about taking what is accurate and put it to its place, then typology will stand on its own and actually be something that has potentials to eliminate bias and to evolve psyches
I am more skeptical of models that rely on surface qualities of a person.. maybe a few of those have their own place
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachmen...0d03a82b90155&